The Care Quality Commission
  • Hospital
  • Independent hospital

Riverbanks Clinic

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Lower Harpenden Road, East Hyde, Bedfordshire, LU2 9QS (01582) 762877

Provided and run by:
RJ Medical Consultants Limited

All Inspections

6 July 2023

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Riverbanks Clinic on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Riverbanks Clinic, you can give feedback on this service.

18 January 2022

During a routine inspection

Riverbanks Clinic is operated by R J Medical Consultants Limited. The clinic opened in 2011. It is a private clinic located in East Hyde, near Luton. The clinic primarily serves the communities of London and Hertfordshire. The service provides consultation and minor cosmetic surgery treatment to self-funding patients aged over 18. The service also treated children and young adults for skin conditions which was not a regulated activity

The main service provided by the clinic is minor cosmetic surgery, for example mole removal, liposuction, face lifts and Botox treatment. All surgery is performed as a day case with local anaesthesia. The clinic also offered a private GP service.

The clinic offered cosmetic procedures such as dermal fillers and laser hair removal, rejuvenation treatments and other cosmetic treatments which are not a regulated activity. We, therefore, did not inspect these procedures.

The service was inspected because it had not been inspected since 2013. The service had previously been inspected using the old methodology when the service was found to meet all the standards.

We completed this inspection using the current methodology, to identify whether the service was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led.

This was the services first inspection using this methodology. We rated it as good because:

  • The service had enough staff to care for patients and keep them safe. Staff had training in key skills, understood how to protect patients from abuse, and managed safety well. The service controlled infection risk well. Staff assessed risks to patients, acted on them and kept good care records. They managed medicines well. The service managed safety incidents well and learned from them.
  • Staff provided good care and treatment, gave patients pain relief when they needed it. The registered manager monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients and supported them to make decisions about their care and had access to good information.
  • Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, took account of their individual needs, and helped them understand their treatment.
  • The service planned care to meet the needs of local people, took account of patients’ individual needs, and made it easy for people to give feedback. People could access the service when they needed it and did not have to wait too long for treatment.
  • The registered manager ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities.

However:

  • The services’ risk register did not outline clinical risks associated with the treatments provided.
  • Meeting minutes were not detailed.

3 October 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection of Riverbanks Clinic on 3 October 2013, the people we spoke with said they were asked to consent before proceeding with any treatment. They said they proceeded with a full understanding of what they were agreeing to. They told us their medical histories were checked as part of the pre-procedure process. Our review of records showed that people's consent, medical histories and specific risk factors were checked and well recorded.

People told us that staff at the service were professional and friendly and treated them with respect. They said they found the service to be very clean and had no complaints. One person said of her experience: "I'm really happy and would recommend them." Another person said: "I'm totally satisfied."

The staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about forms of abuse and how to identify it. They had access to a safeguarding policy and training on safeguarding and infection control was organised for them during our inspection. The staff we spoke with demonstrated a good understanding of infection control procedures. We saw that the service appeared clean and had appropriate arrangements in place to ensure the instruments and equipment used were fit for purpose.

We saw the service had a complaints process in place and complaints people made were responded to appropriately. Our observations and review of documentation showed the service had sufficient arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies.

10 October 2012

During a routine inspection

Riverbanks Clinic offers a range of day care services, many of which are not under the Care Quality Commission registration. Some aesthetic (cosmetic) procedures are covered by the registration and we spoke to four people who had recently received such treatments. All made positive comments about the clinic and it's staff. One person said ''I cannot find fault with it''. Another person said ''they answered my questions realistically and explained what would happen. The clinic was clean, warm and comfortable''.

When we visited Riverbank Clinic, we found good records were kept of the medical history of people, the information they had received and the procedures that had decided upon. People were given good information to take away for reference and people told us that clinic staff were readily available to advise and support them after procedures. Records were kept during the procedure, including any actions taken to minimise risks. A good programme of aftercare was in place and people were strongly encouraged to follow this. They told us they valued this support, which helped them achieve their chosen outcome.