Silicon Dental Centre

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 any issues or omissions. Areas requiring improvement were acted on immediately.

Staff were aware of the importance of protecting patients’ personal information. Staff password protected patients’ electronic care records, and paper records were stored securely and complied with General Data Protection Regulations. The practice had a consultation room where private conversations could be held regarding finances or treatment plans.

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

There were effective processes for identifying and managing risks, investigating incidents and accidents, and for receiving and acting on safety alerts.

The practice had systems and processes for learning, quality assurance and continuous improvement. This included undertaking audits according to recognised guidance.

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, the consultation room was made available to patients who felt anxious while waiting for their appointments, providing a quieter environment in which they could feel more comfortable and relaxed.

Staff had clear responsibilities, and systems of accountability to support good governance. Each staff group had a messaging group where they could discuss role-specific issues and ensure smooth handovers between part-time staff.

Staff feedback was obtained through meetings, surveys, and informal discussions. They were encouraged to offer suggestions for improvements to the service, and they said these were listened to and acted upon, where appropriate. For example, staff lunch breaks were staggered to ensure everyone got a proper break, and the number of staff on reception was increased to reduce workload. The rooftop was being converted into an outdoor staff area intended for lunch breaks.

The practice gathered feedback from patients, the public and external partners, and responded accordingly. For example, when issuing appointment reminders, the practice provided patients with information about local road closures and other traffic-related disruptions that could affect patients' journeys to the practice.

The practice had taken steps to improve environmental sustainability. For example, recycling and adopting a digital workflow 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.