You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 17 February 2014
Date of Publication: 2 April 2014
Inspection Report published 02 April 2014 PDF

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 17 February 2014, talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure patients safety and welfare.

Reasons for our judgement

Patient's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual treatment plan.

Patients spoke positively about the practice. One patient said "It’s the first dentist I feel really relaxed with." Another patient said "They always fit you in, they are all very friendly." The atmosphere within the practice was relaxed and friendly and we observed staff were caring and supportive in their approach to patients. We saw the reception area was staffed throughout the day and telephone calls were answered efficiently in a professional, friendly manner. The waiting area and practice was well maintained and clean with a television and magazines to keep patients occupied whilst they waited. Emergency signage was evident throughout the practice. We saw that the practice had treatment rooms on two levels and we were told by the practice manager that disabled patients would be treated in the ground floor treatment rooms.This meant that patients were assured of receiving treatment that protected their safety and welfare.

We looked at the electronic treatment plans of five patients, for both adults and children. We saw that the records contained up to date medical histories, oral assessments, evidence of consent obtained, x-rays, photographs and referral letters to an implant centre and various different hospitals. We saw evidence of written treatment plans detailing the options discussed at the consultation and the associated costs; we saw that each letter gave the patients a breakdown of what would happen at each of the appointments for example one patients treatment would be performed across four visits, and for each visit there was a description of the treatment that was delivered. All letters describing treatment plans and the options available were dated and signed by the dentist before being given to the patient who signed the letters, using electronic sign pads, which were available in the practice. Patients were then given time to make a decision which best suited their needs. One patient we spoke to told us that that “The dentist was very good at explaining” and “All advantages and disadvantages were explained”. This showed that the treatments were planned to meet patients’ needs ensuring that consistent care was delivered at each appointment.

The practice manager told us patient pathway procedures were in place to refer patients to Oral Surgeons at East Surrey Hospital, Queen Victoria hospital in East Grinstead and University College Hospital in London if a medical opinion was needed regarding an abnormality found during an oral assessment. We were told by the practice manager that no conscious sedation was undertaken at the practice,we saw that they had recently referred a child to St Faiths in East Grinstead for treatment under sedation. These pathways had feedback processes in place to ensure that the dentist was aware of any ongoing management issues regarding their patients oral health. One patient that we spoke with who had experienced treatment between the dentist and the hospital said “ Got a quick appointment and there were no problems, the appointments went well.” This showed that the appropriate referrals were being made to ensure that care and treatment was being delivered around patient needs and that patients' safety and welfare were being considered.

We saw evidence that there were arrangements in place to deal with patient emergencies both in and out of hours. We were told by the practice manager that an answerphone message explaining how patients could seek help out of surgery hours along with the call out costs. We were told by staff that two appointments were made available during the day for emergencies.Patients with Denplan cover have the option to call Denplan out of hours to be allocated an emergency dentist. This meant that patients who used the service had access to necessary care, treatment and support when they needed it.

There were arrangements in plac