We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection of Vantage Diagnostics on 29 November 2018, as part of our inspection programme. It had not been inspected previously.

The service provides online dermatology consultancy triaging (known as “teledermatology”) to general practitioners using digital photography and dermoscopy. The service allows GPs to submit photographs of rashes and lesions remotely for review by consultant dermatologists, who provide the GPs with a report including diagnosis, triage and treatment advice. Clinical responsibility for patients’ healthcare remains with their GPs. The service is not provided directly to patients and does not involve prescribing any medicines.

Vantage Diagnostics has other elements to its business which include the provision of decision support and workflow management software to healthcare providers. These are outside the scope of CQC registration.

Our findings in relation to the key questions were as follows:

Are services safe? – we found the service was providing a safe service in accordance with the relevant regulations. Specifically:

• Arrangements were in place to safeguard people.
• Suitable numbers of staff were employed and appropriately recruited.
• Risks were assessed and action taken to mitigate any risks identified.

Are services effective? - we found the service was providing an effective service in accordance with the relevant regulations. Specifically:

• Information was appropriately shared with a patient’s own GP in line with GMC guidance.
• Quality improvement activity, including clinical audit, took place.
• Staff received the appropriate training to carry out their role.

Are services caring? – we found the service was providing a caring service in accordance with the relevant regulations. Specifically:

• The provider carried out checks to ensure reviews met the expected service standards.
• Patient feedback reflected they found the service treated them with dignity and respect.
• Patients had access to information about the consultant responsible their reviews.

Are services responsive? - we found the service was providing a responsive service in accordance with the relevant regulations. Specifically:

• The provider did not have any direct patient contact, but it took account of the views of the commissioning CCG and participating GPs in delivering services.
• Patients’ consent was required before reviews were accepted by the service’s IT system.
• Information about how to complain was available and complaints were handled appropriately.

Are services well-led? - we found the service was providing a well-led service in accordance with the relevant regulations. Specifically:

• The provider had clear leadership and governance structures.
• A range of information was used to monitor and improve the quality and performance of the service.
• Patient information was held securely.

Professor Steve Field CBE FRCP FFPH FRCGP

Chief Inspector of General Practice