We visited the provider on 08 July 2014 and looked at records relating to the service. We spoke with the clinic manager, who had transferred from another branch of the service three months ago, the lead nurse and two of the therapists. We also spoke with two patients using the service, who were attending treatment appointments at the clinic.

We saw that the clinic was clean and tidy and there were policies and procedures in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. One patient we spoke with commented “in terms of cleanliness it seems fine.” Another commented “it’s dauntingly clean.”

Staff told us that the provider's induction process was thorough, that they were given appropriate further training under supervision, and they felt supported by management.

The provider had an effective complaints procedure, but the process or leaflets explaining how to make a complaint were not on display at the clinic at the time of our inspection.

We inspected the clinic on 2 September 2013. We looked at the treatment records of a number of people and other records relating to the service. We spoke with the clinic manager, who had been in post only a few weeks, lead nurse and one of the therapists. We also spoke with two people using the service, who were attending treatment appointments.

The people we spoke with were very satisfied with the service provided. One said, “Yes, it’s very good. I have no complaints.” They told us that convenient appointments were easy to obtain and that the staff were “friendly and professional.” They told us that they had been provided with sufficient information regarding their treatment and had been able to make informed decisions regarding it. They confirmed that their health and medical histories were checked at the initial consultation and their consent was sought at each stage throughout the course of the treatment.

We saw that the clinic was in a good state of repair and appropriately clean. People who had attended on previous occasions told us they had found the clinic clean at their past visits.

Staff told us that the provider’s induction process was good, that they were given appropriate further training, and that they felt supported by management.

The provider had a suitable complaints procedure, but the opportunity for people to provide general feedback was limited.

People who use the service told us in the quality information they returned to the service that they were treated with dignity, respect and were involved in choosing the type of treatment they needed and when they required it. This was supported by an information pack that was explained to them during consultation.

They said they received quality treatment and support from friendly and competent staff and they felt safe receiving services provided. They told us that they had been contacted by the clinic to identify that they were satisfied with the service and staff delivering it.