Wycherleys Dental Practice

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 not providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations. We will be following up on our concerns to ensure the provider had made the required improvements.

During our inspection of this key question, we found a lack of systems or processes that enabled the registered person to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the services being provided.

This resulted in a breach of Regulation 17, Good governance.

You can find more details of our concerns in the detailed findings below.

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.

There was a lack of sufficient governance and oversight to identify and manage various risks, including risks associated with radiation, recruitment, medicines security, Legionella and fire risk management. Most areas requiring improvement were acted on following our inspection demonstrating the practice’s commitment to making improvements for both staff and patients.

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.

Processes for managing risks required improvement, including ensuring equipment servicing, completion of DBS checks at recruitment, oversight of radiation management and secure storage of medicines. There were effective processes for investigating incidents and accidents, and for receiving and acting on safety alerts.

The practice had systems and processes for quality assurance and continuous improvement. This included undertaking audits. We found shortfalls with monitoring of staff training.

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

Staff had responsibilities, however systems of accountability to support good governance were lacking.

Staff feedback was obtained through meetings 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.

The practice gathered feedback from patients, the public and external partners, and responded accordingly.

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.