152 Harley Street Limited

Updated 28 March 2023

152 Harley Street is operated by 152 Harley Street Limited. The hospital opened in 2010 and provides private services to local and international clients. The hospital occupies the 3rd and 4th floor of a shared building refurbished for clinical activities.

The hospital provides day case cosmetic, plastic, and reconstructive surgery using local anaesthetic with sedation. Outpatient services are available for adults and children over the age of 5. The range of services offered includes dermatology, cryotherapy, oral & maxillofacial surgery, and complex dental reconstruction. The clinic has 5 consulting rooms, 3 operating theatres, and 2 recovery bays.

The service also provides care and treatment under the brand name The London Scar Clinic. This is the same registered service operating under a different name for the purposes of marketing and clarity for patients. The organisation also offers unregulated aesthetic treatments and cosmetic surgery referral services under the name NEO Health. Our inspection report includes only those services that fall under the regulated activities.

The service has a registered manager in post.

Clinical services delivered by other providers take place on site. These do not form part of our inspection or ratings other than consideration of local premises safety procedures.

The main regulated service provided by this provider was cosmetic surgery. Where our findings on another core service – for example, management arrangements – also apply to other services, we do not repeat the information but cross-refer to the surgery service. We do not regulate or inspect aesthetic treatments.

We last inspected the service in May 2018. At that inspection we did not have a duty to rate and instead published a narrative report. At that inspection we found no significant areas of concern and noted broadly good practice and standards of care.

We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring responsive, and well led.

Updated 28 March 2023

We have not previously rated this service. 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 lessons from them.
• Staff provided good care and treatment and managed pain effectively. Managers monitored the effectiveness of the service and made sure staff were competent. Staff worked well together for the benefit of patients, advised them on how to lead healthier lives, 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 conditions. They provided emotional support to patients, families and carers.
• The service planned care to meet the needs of people and gaps in care in the region. Staff 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.
• Leaders ran services well using reliable information systems and supported staff to develop their skills. Staff understood the service’s vision and values, and how to apply them in their work. Staff felt respected, supported and valued. They were focused on the needs of patients receiving care. Staff were clear about their roles and accountabilities. The service engaged well with patients and the wider healthcare community to plan and manage services and all staff were committed to improving services continually.

However:

• Audits identified a need for more consistent assurance of consultant compliance with the UK General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR).
• Coordinated and shared fire safety practise with other organisations in the building were inconsistent, although local arrangements reflected good practice. It was not evident the service had resolved concerns raised during a fire safety building inspection.
• While most of the hospital was fully compliant with national requirements for the clinical environment, some areas included carpets and soft furnishings, which were non-compliant. However, the service had risk mitigation in place for this.

Updated 28 March 2023

We have not previously rated this service. We rated it as good.

Services for children and young people is a small proportion of clinic activity. The main service was cosmetic surgery. Where arrangements were the same, we have reported findings in the cosmetic surgery section.

We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well led. Please see the main summary.

Updated 28 March 2023

We have not previously rated this service. We rated it as good.

Outpatients is a small proportion of clinic activity. The main service was cosmetic surgery. Where arrangements were the same, we have reported findings in the cosmetic surgery section.

We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well led. Please see the main summary.

Updated 28 March 2023

We rated this service as good because it was safe, effective, caring, responsive, and well led.

Please see the main summary.