Policy FAQs

The clinic operates a formal Refund, Cancellation and Rescheduling Policy that covers the operational mechanics — notice windows, applicable conditions, and the route for handling specific cases. Reasonable cancellation and rescheduling is treated as ordinary patient-flow within the framework rather than as a fee-trigger for penalty. The formal policy text — the source document for the operational specifics — sits in the policies section. This FAQ summarises the framing and routes to the formal policy rather than restating the policy text.

The consultation fee is structured as the cost of the consultation visit itself. The framework treats the consultation as substantive value-creating — the patient receives the calibrated assessment, the photographic baseline where applicable, and the written plan. The formal Refund, Cancellation and Rescheduling Policy in the policies section covers the specific scenarios where adjustments apply (rescheduling within notice windows, selected exceptional circumstances, and similar). The policy document is the formal source rather than this FAQ.

The framework supports patient flexibility within active pathways. Where a multi-session course is partially completed, the operational handling of the remaining-session portion is covered in the formal Refund, Cancellation and Rescheduling Policy. The framework treats fee handling as fair-rather-than-penalising and the formal policy carries the binding text. Patients with specific questions about their case can raise them in the consultation or follow-up conversation.

Reasonable rescheduling on short notice — illness, urgent personal context, work-context emergencies — is treated within the framework rather than as a default fee-trigger. The formal Refund, Cancellation and Rescheduling Policy carries the specific notice-window mechanics. Patients with rescheduling needs are encouraged to contact the clinic as early as the situation allows so the slot can be re-allocated.

The formal Refund, Cancellation and Rescheduling Policy sits in the policies section as a separate document. Patients can read the formal text at the policies hub before booking or at any point during an active pathway. The framework keeps the formal policy text in the policies section as the formal source rather than embedding it across multiple FAQ pages where text-drift could occur.

Where the pathway warrants a photographic baseline (selected acne, pigmentation, hair-loss, ageing, and procedural-tracking pathways), the patient is informed before any capture and consents at the time. Default use is clinical-record-only — supporting the patient's own care and the clinical conversation at follow-up — and any other use requires separate explicit consent. The framework treats photographs as patient health information rather than as marketing material. The medical photography page covers the framework.

No, not without separate explicit consent specifically for that use. Default consent at the consultation covers clinical-record use only. Marketing or educational use requires its own consent process with clearly framed scope (which platforms, what duration, what the patient can request to be removed, and similar). The framework keeps the default narrow rather than asking patients to opt-out of broad blanket consent. Patients who do not wish to be photographed at all are accommodated as far as is consistent with safe clinical practice.

Yes. The framework treats consent as withdrawable. Patients can request withdrawal of consent for marketing or educational use at any point and the clinic acts on the withdrawal per the formal Patient Consent and Photography Policy in the policies section. For clinical-record retention the framework follows standard medical-records retention practice; the formal policy covers the specific mechanics. Patients with a specific concern can raise it with the clinic at any point.

Patient photographs are stored under the patient-records framework rather than in personal-device albums. Access is limited to the dermatologist and trained clinical-team members involved in the patient's care, and the framework does not pass patient images to third-party marketing parties without consent. The formal Patient Privacy and Records Policy in the policies section carries the binding mechanics around storage and access.

The formal Patient Consent and Photography Policy and the formal Patient Privacy and Records Policy both sit in the policies section as separate documents. Patients can read the formal text at the policies hub. The framework keeps the formal policy in the policies section as the formal source rather than embedding it across multiple FAQ pages.

Online or video-based consultation is appropriate in selected contexts — initial orientation visits for distance-restricted patients, follow-up reviews where in-person examination is not necessary, selected coordination visits, and prescription review where the regulatory framework supports it. The framework recognises that some clinical decisions require in-person examination and routes those visits accordingly. The formal Teleconsultation Policy in the policies section carries the binding mechanics.

Yes. The Telemedicine Practice Guidelines issued under the broader medical-regulatory framework in India set out the conditions under which registered medical practitioners can deliver teleconsultation. The framework operates within the regulatory parameters around patient identification, consent, prescription scope, record-keeping, and the clinical contexts where teleconsultation is and is not appropriate. The clinic's formal policy reflects the prevailing regulatory framework.

Routine follow-up reviews, history-taking, prescription review where the regulatory framework supports it, and selected coordination conversations are typically appropriate for video format. Initial assessment of any condition that requires examination, procedural decisions that depend on examination findings, and contexts where physical examination is medically necessary are not appropriate for teleconsultation alone. The framework calibrates the visit format to the clinical question at hand rather than to patient-convenience preference alone.

Selected prescriptions can be issued via teleconsultation per the prevailing Telemedicine Practice Guidelines, with regulatory boundaries around what categories of medication are within scope. The framework operates within those boundaries and routes the patient to in-person consultation where the regulatory or clinical context warrants it. The formal Teleconsultation Policy carries the binding mechanics; the framework does not stretch the regulatory boundaries.

The formal Teleconsultation Policy sits in the policies section as a separate document. Patients can read the formal text at the policies hub before booking a video visit or at any point during an active pathway. The framework keeps the formal policy in the policies section as the formal source.

Where a patient has a formal concern about the care received, the conduct of the consultation, the handling of an appointment, or any other aspect of the patient-clinic interaction, the formal Complaints and Grievance Redressal Policy in the policies section is the route for handling. The framework treats grievance handling as a substantive patient-rights element rather than as a defensive layer; the policy covers the route for raising the concern, the response timelines, and the escalation route where applicable. The framework distinguishes calibration-stage adjustment within an active pathway (handled through follow-up) from formal grievance handling (handled through the formal policy).

Patient privacy is governed by the formal Patient Privacy and Records Policy in the policies section. The framework treats patient health information as confidential and access-controlled, with the dermatologist and trained clinical-team members involved in the patient's care having appropriate access for that purpose. The framework does not share patient information with third parties without appropriate consent or regulatory basis. The formal policy carries the binding mechanics around storage, access, retention, and patient-side rights.

Yes. Patient access to their own record is part of the formal patient-rights framework; the framework treats records as patient-supportive rather than as proprietary clinic information. The operational route for accessing records — including consultation summaries, photographic baselines where applicable, and follow-up notes — is detailed in the Patient Privacy and Records Policy. Patients with a specific access request can raise it with the clinic per the formal route.

The clinic's public-facing content follows formal Editorial Standards and a formal Advertising and Marketing Policy. The framework explicitly avoids comparison-image-led advertising of clinical pathways in line with prevailing regulatory guidance on dermatology and cosmetic-procedure advertising in India, avoids time-limited "act-now" promotional pricing for medical pathways, and avoids influencer-discount or commission-driven referral promotion of clinical pathways. The editorial standards page covers the editorial framework, and the formal Advertising and Marketing Policy in the policies section covers the binding text.

The policies section is the entry to the formal policy documents. The hub indexes the Refund, Cancellation and Rescheduling Policy, the Patient Consent and Photography Policy, the Patient Privacy and Records Policy, the Teleconsultation Policy, the Complaints and Grievance Redressal Policy, the Advertising and Marketing Policy, and other formal documents the clinic operates. Each policy is a separate document, kept as the formal source rather than restated across the FAQ layer where text-drift could occur. This FAQ summarises the framing and routes to the formal documents.