You are here

Archived: Greystone Dental Practice

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 24 July 2013
Date of Publication: 20 August 2013
Inspection Report published 20 August 2013 PDF | 71.08 KB

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 24 July 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

Patients were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment.

Patients were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed.

Reasons for our judgement

The service met the essential requirements of Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary dental practices (HTM01-05). The HTM 01-05 was designed to assist all registered primary dental care services to meet satisfactory levels of decontamination. The service had a designated decontamination room and a system to ensure dirty and clean instruments did not come into contact with one another. Instruments were cleaned manually and in an ultra-sonic cleaner before being inspected for any residual debris. They were then sterilised in an autoclave.

Staff told us if instruments were not used the same day after being sterilised, they were packaged and labelled with a date of expiry. We saw instruments were stored away in drawers with labels to indicate when they would need sterilising again.

The service used a recognised hygiene and infection control audit for dental services. This audit was last undertaken in April 2013. The hygiene and infection control lead told us what action had been taken to reduce the risk of infection as a result of the audit. For example a Legionella risk assessment was undertaken by a contractor. There is a requirement in HTM:01-05 guidance for dental services to have a plan for working towards HTM:01-05 best practice. The service had a plan for how it would alter the decontamination area to meet best practice.

The service undertook checks required on their decontamination equipment. For example daily logs were stored on a computer for temperature checks on the autoclave. We saw servicing records were in date for decontamination equipment. This ensured decontamination equipment was effective. The service had consignment notes which indicated clinical waste was removed by appropriate contractors.

Staff had been immunised against infectious diseases such as Hepatitis B where they were at potential risk. We observed personal protective equipment such as gloves, aprons and face masks were available and used when decontaminating instruments. Patients told us staff always used gloves, aprons and face masks when treating them. The dentist and the hygiene and infection control lead said treatment rooms were cleaned regularly. Another dentist told us they had a process for cleaning treatment areas between patients. We saw the treatment rooms, waiting area and toilet were clean. Patients told us they always found the practice to be clean. Hand wash basins had liquid soap dispensers and paper towels for hand drying.