The sudden closure of SKIN, a prominent name in the cosmetic surgery industry, has left hundreds of patients without critical post-surgery care, raising serious concerns over industry practices. The collapse has affected patients who recently had procedures through Harley Street Medical Group (HSMG), as well as those who had prepaid for upcoming surgeries.
Patients are now facing uncertainty about how they will receive follow-up care, with many left unable to contact their surgeons or medical staff. For those who have undergone recent operations, this raises fears about possible complications going unaddressed, while others are left wondering what will happen to their prepaid treatments.
In the wake of SKIN’s closure, there has been minimal communication from the company to both its staff and patients. An anonymous practitioner from HSMG revealed that the closure was abrupt, leaving staff in a state of confusion. “We were told this morning not to come into work tomorrow,” they said. “Our managers weren’t even aware until today. It’s all been kept very quiet. Patients arrived for appointments today, and I had to turn them away.”
The lack of transparency and sudden halt to services has sparked criticism about the company’s business model, with many questioning whether SKIN prioritised profits over patient safety. Annabelle, founder of the Cosmetic Surgery Advancements website and Consultant Directory, pointed to Harley Street Medical Group as an example of the dangers present in the cosmetic surgery industry.
“Harley Street Medical Group, like many large cosmetic surgery companies, has a history of putting profits before patient care. They were one of the clinics that purchased PIP implants, which were cheaper than other options. Most reputable surgeons avoided these implants, knowing they were substandard long before it was discovered they contained industrial-grade silicone,” she said.
PIP implants, which were used in cosmetic procedures before being banned, became a symbol of controversy after it was revealed they contained non-medical grade silicone. This scandal highlighted the lack of regulation and the potential risks when companies prioritise cost-cutting over patient welfare.
Mr Douglas McGeorge FRCS (Plast), a respected cosmetic and plastic surgeon, voiced his support for Annabelle’s mission to promote more transparency and patient safety in the sector. “This case serves as a stark reminder that the appeal of cosmetic surgery should not overshadow the need for thorough research and careful consideration. Choosing a provider based on reputation alone, without looking into their qualifications and practices, can lead to dangerous consequences,” he warned.
SKIN issued a brief statement acknowledging the impact of its closure but offered little in the way of reassurance for patients. The statement has done little to calm the growing concerns over the stability and ethics of large cosmetic surgery firms.
The closure of SKIN has highlighted the need for more stringent oversight in the cosmetic surgery industry. The situation also serves as a warning for potential patients to thoroughly vet providers before committing to any procedures, ensuring they prioritise safety and care over profit.
This incident underscores the importance of ethical business practices and financial stability in the sector, reminding patients to carefully consider all aspects when choosing a cosmetic surgery provider.
