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

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 service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

InHealth Limited provides an Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) and Audiology Hearing Aid Service at The Adelaide Medical Centre under an NHS contract for adults only. Services are accessed via the NHS Choose and Book system and referrals triaged by the InHealth patient referral centre.

The service is registered with CQC to provide the regulated activities: diagnostic and screening procedures; and treatment of disease, disorder. The types of services provided are doctors consultation service and doctors treatment service.

At the time of our inspection a registered manager was in place. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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 service is run.

We did not receive comment cards from patients on the day of the inspection visit, but were able to view feedback from patients received by the service. Feedback was very positive about the service delivered at the service.

Our key findings were:

• Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure patient's safety and welfare.
• All treatment rooms were well-organised and well-equipped. Clinicians assessed patients according to appropriate guidance and standards, such as those issued by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence.
• Staff were up to date with current guidelines and were led by a proactive management team.
• Staff maintained the necessary skills and competence to support the needs of patients.
• There were effective systems in place to check all equipment had been serviced regularly.
• The provider was aware of, and complied with, the requirements of the Duty of Candour.
• The provider had an effective system for ensuring the identity of patients who attended the service.
• Risks to patients were well-managed. For example, there were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.
• Patients were provided with information about their health and received advice and guidance to support them to live healthier lives.
• Information about how to complain was available and easy to understand.
• The provider had appropriate governance systems in place to promote safe, effective and well led service provision.

However, there are areas where the provider should make improvements:

• Review signage to inform patients that a hearing loop is available for use.

During our visit we spent time in the Ear Nose and Throat (ENT) and Audiology department. There were appointments for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Scans available and carried out on a mobile unit on the Adelaide Medical Centre Site. However, we were unable to view or speak with patients waiting for a scan at the time of our visit.

For ENT patients, the service was run by GP with Specialist Interest (GPwSI) with the support of ENT specialists. Nurse Practitioner Aural Care Clinics were also offered. Having been assessed most patients were managed within the service where possible.

We spoke with two patients who attended the ENT and Audiology department. Both patients were pleased with the service they received and said the staff were excellent. They told us they had no reason to complain and felt the staff were all very pleasant and complimented the service they had received. One person was pleased to be offered a telephone follow up appointment which meant they did not have to attend the clinic again.

Patient’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected. They experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. Patients were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed. They were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.