You are here

Archived: Andover Dental Practice

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 October 2012
Date of Publication: 9 November 2012
Inspection Report published 9 November 2012 PDF | 79.38 KB

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 12 October 2012, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights.

Reasons for our judgement

People’s needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual treatment plan. We spoke with three people attending the practice during our visit and observed another person’s care during a routine examination. Everyone was positive about the quality of care they had received. They said that they had been told what to expect during the treatment and were given reassurance throughout the procedures. People said that they were confident that they received good dental care. One person told us they had elected to travel to receive care from the dentist, after having moved away from the region, due to the confidence they had in the quality of care provided. People could recall having had a treatment plan provided for specific treatments. They said they were always asked if there had been changes to their medical history since their last visit. We observed this being carried out in practice.

From looking at records, we saw that initial consultations included a full dental history and examination, with X-rays taken as appropriate. We saw that patients were required to sign medical history forms. Any allergies were highlighted within the electronic record system. At each appointment people’s oral health was fully assessed.

The dentist outlined the approach to agreeing frequency of appointments, based on people’s risks. The clinic received safety alert notifications, which advised them of, for instance, product recalls.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. The clinic had equipment and procedures in place for resuscitation, and staff were trained to provide basic life support for adults and children. We saw that the emergency drugs and the first aid box were checked regularly. The resuscitation equipment had been serviced in the past four months, and was stored in an accessible location with appropriate signage. The provider may find it useful to note that although we were assured that this equipment was checked regularly by the dental nurse, there was no record of this in place.