NR Aesthetics and Skin Ltd Also known as NR Aesthetics & Skin

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Peoples’ needs were assessed, and care and treatment were delivered in line with current legislation, standards and evidence-based guidance. The clinician took time to listen to people and ensure they were involved in all aspects of their treatment. People gave positive feedback about the way the clinician treated them. The clinician made sure people understood their care and treatment to enable them to give informed consent.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People said they were confident their individual needs had been appropriately assessed and were understood by the clinician. The consultation process required people to complete information regarding their health and well-being before their appointment so this could be assessed by the clinician and discussed at the appointment.

The clinician took a holistic approach to people’s care and treatment to ensure their immediate and ongoing needs were fully assessed. Where appropriate, people’s clinical needs and their mental and physical wellbeing was considered. We saw that comprehensive consultation notes were written for each service user where their needs and preferences were detailed. People’s care needs were reviewed at each appointment. We saw no evidence of discrimination when the clinician made care and treatment decisions. The clinician reviewed people's reasons for requesting the treatment and discussions were held around people’s expectations regarding the results of the proposed treatments.

People said they were given information and guidance about their options for treatment and the risks and benefits of these.

The clinician assessed people’s needs and delivered care in line with relevant and current evidence-based guidance as per each treatment they offered. Service policies were in place to ensure they worked within national guidance. Consultation notes we sampled demonstrated care was provided in line with current evidence-based good practice and standards. The clinician linked with organisations such as the British Association of Medical Aesthetic Nurses (BAMAN) where they attended both regional and national meetings and accessed training specific to the treatments provided. In addition to regularly attending aesthetic conferences and training events, the clinician was subscribed to and a member of, various organisations such as the British Dermatology Nursing Group (BDNG) and Complications in Medical Aesthetics Collaborative (CMAC) to keep up to date.

The clinician had processes in place so information was shared between the service and the patient’s GP where necessary. People with complex issues would be referred to their GP. The clinician was a lone worker but had developed a network of support with other organisations and providers. For example, the clinician attended meetings held by the Joint Council for Medical Practitioners (JCCP) and British Association of Medical Aesthetic Nurses (BAMAN). These meetings facilitated reflection and face to face peer reviews with other nurses. In addition, the clinician had linked with another local aesthetics provider where they arranged quarterly, or more frequent, meetings with each other as required.

Where appropriate, the clinician gave people advice so they could self-care. The clinician was also currently exploring how service users could benefit from joined up collaboration and working with a wellness and health coaching organisation. Policies and procedures were in place to ensure people had all the information they needed in relation to the medical procedure they received. The clinician understood the importance of giving people additional guidance alongside their procedure to ensure they would get the best possible outcome from the treatment. As part of the consultation process, potential risk factors were identified and explained to the service user and with their consent, the clinician highlighted these to relevant care providers such as their GP. Where people’s needs could not be met by the service, the clinician redirected them to the appropriate service.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. The service collated feedback from service users via email and there was a box in the clinic to collect anonymous feedback. We saw evidence of audits which had been completed and identified improvements. The service had also recently linked up with a local provider offering similar aesthetics procedures to undertake cross audit to identify areas for improvement.

It was evident from speaking with the clinician that they understood the requirements of legislation and guidance when considering consent and decision making. People using the service were supported to make decisions and where appropriate discussions about a patient’s mental health and/or capacity to make a decision was considered. If the clinician felt a treatment would not provide the outcome that the patient desired, then the treatment was refused.