You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 23 November 2012
Date of Publication: 12 December 2012
Inspection Report published 12 December 2012 PDF

People should be cared for in a clean environment and protected from the risk of infection (outcome 8)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Providers of services comply with the requirements of regulation 12, with regard to the Code of Practice for health and adult social care on the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.

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 23 November 2012, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed. People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke with two people who used the service about the cleanliness of the practice; both told us they felt the practice was clean. One person told us "Everything is clean. It is spotless and the staff are too".

Both people told us staff always wore gloves and other protective clothing to prevent cross contamination and ensured people who used the service wore protective goggles. This was confirmed by our observation on the day.

We spoke with two members of staff. The staff members we spoke to told us that they had received training for infection control and had received and read the practice's infection control policy. One of the staff members, a senior dental nurse, told us that she had responsibility for infection control and the policies and procedures that were in place. Both staff members described to us how they managed infection control within the surgery showing that they had a good knowledge of procedure.

We looked at the decontamination procedures for the dental practice.

The dental practice had a large decontamination room which was separate from the treatment area. We

saw that the 'dirty' decontamination area and the 'clean' decontamination area were clearly identified. Used dental instruments were brought into the decontamination room in a 'dirty' box and were passed through the decontamination procedure. Sterile instruments were then stored using a traffic light system. The was 7, 14 or 21 days for the recirculation of dental instruments depending on what they were. Sterile instruments were taken to the treatment area in a sterile box. This showed that there were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.