You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 February 2014
Date of Publication: 7 March 2014
Inspection Report published 07 March 2014 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 10 February 2014, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

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

Reasons for our judgement

There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. The practice had access to the current Department of Health document published in 2013 called "Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices" (HTM01-05). The document describes the processes and practices essential to prevent the spread of infections and ensure clean, safe care. It also sets out two standards of compliance for dental practices. These are "essential quality requirements" which are compulsory and "best practice" which are ideal and desirable.

We observed two patient treatment sessions and saw that the staff were aware of effective hand hygiene procedures. They used appropriate personal protective equipment for themselves and the patients. This equipment included gloves, aprons, face shields and protective eye glasses.

The staff explained and demonstrated the procedures for cleaning the surgery after treatment had taken place. We were also shown the decontamination and sterilisation procedures for the equipment that had been used. Decontamination is the process by which reusable items are rendered safe for further use and for staff to handle. Decontamination is required to minimise the risk of cross-infection between patients and between patients and staff.

After equipment had been decontaminated it was pouched, date stamped and stored appropriately.

Daily checks of decontamination equipment were carried out and recorded in accordance with manufacturer's guidelines. This ensured that machines were working correctly.

A sharps injury procedure was displayed for the staff in the decontamination room. This listed clear guidelines for staff to follow in the event of a needlestick or sharps injury. Relevant contact details were also on the procedure. This ensured that staff would be protected from any blood-borne viruses.

The provider may find it useful to note that HTM 01-05 essential quality requirements states that 'Staff involved in decontamination should demonstrate current immunisation for hepatitis B'. However, we saw no up to date immunisation certificates for any members of staff. This meant that staff may not have been fully protected against this illness.

We saw evidence that a daily infection control and cleaning checklist was in place in each surgery. There was clear written guidance that listed staff roles and responsibilities in infection control.

Regular cleaning audits had been carried out and we saw that the last audit that had taken place in October 2013.

Clinical waste was stored and disposed of appropriately with the provider keeping consignment notes on file in accordance with the clinical waste regulations.