Iffley Dental

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We found this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Shared direction and culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Freedom to speak up is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The practice had a governance system that included policies and procedures, which were accessible to staff and were reviewed on a regular basis.

Systems and processes were embedded, and the inspection did not highlight significant issues or omissions.

Staff were aware of the importance of protecting patients’ personal information. Electronic care records were password protected. However, the accident book in use was not compliant with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) requirements.

Relevant policies and protocols were in place for the use of closed-circuit television (CCTV).

There were effective systems and processes in place for identifying and managing risks, as well as for investigating incidents and accidents and responding to safety alerts.

The practice had systems and processes for learning, quality assurance and continuous improvement. This included undertaking audits according to recognised guidance. However, clinical record-keeping audits identified areas requiring improvement and there was no evidence to demonstrate that the findings from these audits were acted upon or appropriately followed through. We did not find evidence of documented action plans, completed re-audits, or effective oversight arrangements to ensure that required improvements were implemented and sustained in practice.

Concerns and complaints were responded to appropriately, and outcomes were discussed to share learning and for improvement.

We noted innovative approaches to providing person centred care. For example, patient feedback was actively sought through multiple channels, including automated post-appointment review requests, and staff responded promptly and personally to feedback received. The provider took a proactive approach to improving access and addressing health inequalities by offering additional emergency appointments for NHS 111 referrals and engaging with local GP practices to encourage dental attendance among patients with diabetes. The service also delivered oral health promotion sessions within local schools, supporting prevention and community engagement.

Staff had clear responsibilities, and systems of accountability to support good governance.

Staff feedback was obtained through meetings, surveys, and informal discussions. Staff were encouraged to offer suggestions for improvements to the service and told us these were listened to and acted upon where appropriate. For example, following staff feedback, weekly newsletters were reduced to a monthly format to better manage the volume of communication.

The practice gathered feedback from patients, the public and external partners, and responded accordingly. For example, patient feedback highlighted that the disabled parking bay markings were difficult to see. In response, the practice arranged for the bay to be repainted to improve visibility and accessibility.

The practice had taken steps to improve environmental sustainability. For example, facilities were in place to encourage cycling, including bicycle racks for staff and patients. The practice also used digital systems, such as electronic appointment reminders, digital X-rays, and electronic clinical records, to reduce paper usage. In addition, staff were mindful of clinical waste and took appropriate steps to minimise environmental impact where possible.

The judgement for Partnerships and communities is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Learning, improvement and innovation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.