The Dentalist Loughborough

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

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

Although there are issues to be addressed, the impact of our concerns relates to the governance and the oversight of systems and processes.

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

The judgement for Assessing needs is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The provider had systems to ensure that people who used the service received person-centred care and treatment, that was appropriate, met their needs and was reflective of their personal preferences. Preventive oral health care was encouraged.

Staff kept up-to-date with current evidence-based practice, and had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.

The practice offered conscious sedation for patients. The practice’s systems included checks before and after treatment, emergency equipment requirements, medicines management, sedation equipment checks and staff availability. Improvements were required to ensure all staff were up to date with intermediate life support training. We received assurance this had been actioned immediately following the inspection.

We looked at a sample of patient care records. The information recorded in these records was not consistently completed in line with recognised guidance. We found records were not always complete, contemporaneous and were not always comprehensively written to include necessary information, in line with guidance.

The practice’s procedures for obtaining patient consent to care and treatment did not always comply with legislation.

Staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff described how they involved patients’ relatives or carers when appropriate and made sure they had enough time to explain treatment options clearly.

The practice had systems for prescribing and dispensing medicines. We identified scope to strengthen the monitoring and tracking of dispensed medicine, which was addressed by the practice immediately following our inspection.

Patients were referred to primary and secondary care specialists for treatment the practice did not provide. This included referring patients with suspected cancer under the national faster diagnosis pathways. Improvements should be made to systems and processes for oversight of referrals made to private practices, to ensure appropriate follow-up. The provider took immediate action to address this issue following the inspection.

Staff felt the practice supported them to develop and enabled them to take on responsibilities.

The judgement for How staff, teams and services work together is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Supporting people to live healthier lives is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Monitoring and improving outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Consent to care and treatment is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.