ClinicsDoctorsTreatmentsResourcesWho we areAsk PATHBelow-average outcomes — strongest for ages 40-42.
Based on age-adjusted HFEA live-birth data (2016–18) vs the UK national average.
Your question about this clinic travels with you — after sign-up it's waiting as the start of your first PATH conversation.
Lister Fertility Clinic, Chelsea Outpatient Centre LLP presents a mixed but coherent portrait across these reviews: a clinic capable of delivering technically successful cycles for some patients while showing variable performance in patient experience, communication, and aftercare. Several patients praised the front-line clinical team — nurses, sonographers and phlebotomists — for being professional, responsive and, in many cases, memorably kind. Staff names and individual clinicians are called out positively (Elena; Raef Farris), and one reviewer contrasted Lister favourably against slow NHS care, noting speed, flexibility with scheduling and an accessible published pricing structure. For some patients those attributes translated into real clinical success and gratitude; one reviewer explicitly credits the clinic with outcomes they believe they would not have achieved elsewhere. However, recurring criticisms temper that positive picture. Multiple reviewers describe a high-volume, “conveyor belt” model that produces long waits (often one to two hours per appointment and multi-hour monitoring visits during stimulation), routinised protocols and a sense of impersonality. Communication and coordination lapses appear in several accounts: wrong prescriptions issued, failure to provide timely clinic notes, inconsistent counselling about treatment options (for example contradictory advice about ICSI vs non-ICSI approaches and the later suggestion of IUI), and a slow or dismissive escalation response when concerns are raised. Administrative friction also shows up as billing and charging problems (being charged for medications not received, disputes about compensatory offers) and delays in record transfer. Clinical outcomes described by reviewers are mixed. One patient reports strong egg numbers but unexpectedly poor embryo development and attributes that outcome to perceived standardised protocols rather than individualised stimulation. Another patient reports good IVF success. The embryology team’s technical performance and bedside manner draw direct criticism in at least one detailed account; conversely a counsellor and some senior nursing staff are singled out for providing emotional support where the wider team did not. There is also a serious safety concern raised: a post-retrieval inpatient complication consistent with OHSS and a reported poorly managed catheter episode and infection, which suggests gaps in post-procedure monitoring and peri-procedural nursing support for some patients. In summary, Lister appears to offer competent, often quick and flexible fertility services with strong nursing and allied staff for many patients, but it also shows systemic weaknesses in throughput-driven processes, administrative coordination, some aspects of embryology communication, and occasional lapses in inpatient aftercare. Prospective patients should weigh the clinic’s responsiveness and published pricing against reported variability in individualised treatment planning, embryology communication and post-procedure follow-up.
Source: HFEA regulated data. Best age band: 40-42. Weakest: Under 35.
No cost details listed for this clinic. Contact the clinic directly for an indicative quote.
Patient-review insights for this clinic aren't ingested yet. The HFEA-regulated outcomes shown elsewhere on this page are the most reliable signal until then.
We don't yet have a verified consultant list for this clinic. Browse the full doctors directory for GMC-registered specialists.
Written in PATH's voice from this clinic's published HFEA data — reviewed before publishing, never generated live.
Lister Fertility Clinic, Chelsea Outpatient Centre LLP is rated below average by the HFEA, with a live-birth rate of 23% against a national average of 31%, a gap of eight percentage points. Its best-performing band is 40-42, while under-35 patients see its weakest relative results here, which is worth asking about directly given that pattern is unusual. This is a medium-volume clinic, so the figures rest on a fair number of cycles rather than a small sample.
The figure is a live-birth rate per embryo transferred, from HFEA-verified regulated data covering 2016 to 2018 - a description of outcomes across the clinic's patients in that period, not a prediction for you. Two checks are worth making before comparing it to another clinic: whether both are quoting per embryo transferred or per cycle started, since these tell different stories, and which years each figure actually covers.
Good questions to bring - what's included in the quoted price and what add-on costs are typical; and what their live-birth rates were for your age group in the latest HFEA data, since a clinic-wide average can obscure real differences by band. With a below-average headline result, it's also reasonable to ask what's behind that number and their best treatment focus in practice, which here is PGT-A. A good consultant will welcome these questions.
These answers use published data only — PATH personalizes once it knows your age, your numbers, and your story.
Ready to start your journey? Contact the clinic directly.
Ask PATH if this clinic fits youRequest ConsultationOpens in the app — you'll create a free account first.
Compare ClinicsfertilityPATH earns no referral fees. We recommend clinics based on data, not commercial relationships.
