We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 5 September 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the centre was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Bupa Centre – Austin Friars is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the regulated activities of Diagnostic and Screening procedures; Transport, triage and medical advice provided remotely and Treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The address of the registered centre is Bupa Austin – Centre Austin Friars, 2-6 Austin Friars, London, EC2N 2HD. https://www.bupa.com.

The centre manager is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the centre. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the centre is run.

As part of our inspection we asked for CQC comment cards to be completed by patients prior to our inspection. We received 11 comment cards which were all positive about the standard of care received at the centre.

Our key findings were:

• The centre routinely reviewed the effectiveness and appropriateness of the care it provided.
• The centre had a clear system for managing and learning from complaints and incidents. However, they were not following their own policies regarding the timescales in which incidents should be managed. Learning from complaints and incidents was widely shared among all staff and other relevant organisations.
• The centre had a programme of audits carried out by the organisation’s quality improvement team. Additionally, the centre undertook ad-hoc local audits.
• Staff involved and treated patients with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.
• Patients found the appointment system easy to use and reported that they were able to access care when they needed it.
• There was a strong focus on continuous learning and improvement at all levels of the organisation.
• The centre had an overarching governance framework in place, including policies and protocols which had been developed at corporate level.
• The centre had good systems to manage risk so that safety incidents were less likely to happen.

There were areas where the provider should make some improvements.

The provider should:

• Investigate incidents in line with the organisation’s policies and procedures.
• Improve ways to have an internal process to improve clinicians' individual performance.

We spoke with one person who used the service who told us, “they are very professional and polite. I had confidence in them and it [the service] met my expectations.” People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. People were asked to give their consent before they received care or treatment and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

The clinic was run by qualified doctors, trained health advisers, a radiographer, management and administrative staff. People received a Bupa health assessment, giving them a detailed profile of their overall health including areas of increased risk to them and advice on how to improve their health and fitness.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. The provider had taken steps to provide the service in an environment that was suitably designed and adequately maintained. People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

We spoke with two people who attended the centre and both were complimentary about their service. The service had also received mostly positive feedback from other people who had recently used the service. Their comments included, "Overall, a positive experience. All good". "Extremely satisfied. Thoroughly enjoyed the experience".