You are here

Archived: Ellison and Griffiths Dental Practice

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 21 February 2013
Date of Publication: 19 March 2013
Inspection Report published 19 March 2013 PDF | 79.67 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 21 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People were cared for and treated in a clean, hygienic environment.

Reasons for our judgement

People spoken with considered the premises, in particular the surgeries, were clean and hygienic. They said: “The surgery is functional, always clean and tidy”, also “It’s definitely kept clean” and “Spotless in the surgery”.

On the day of the inspection visit we found the dental practice to be bright, clean and well maintained. Surgeries were cleaned and prepared between appointments. This involved removing used instruments for cleaning and sterilizing, wiping the dental chair and surfaces, making sure the appropriate dental instruments and protective equipment was available.

Protective equipment was seen to be available for people using the service and staff. People spoken with told us this equipment was always used when they received treatment.

The practice had a separate room for sterilizing instruments. Equipment and facilities were available to clean and sterilize dental instruments. Regular checks were carried out on the sterilizing equipment and arrangements were in place for ongoing servicing and maintenance. There was a designated infection control lead person, who explained the processes in place for the cleaning, disinfection and sterilization of reusable equipment and instruments. The provider may find it useful to note, there was a lack of written instructions in the decontamination room, to effectively guide staff through these processes. We found some cleaning equipment for clinical and none clinical areas, was stored in the decontamination room, which presented as a risk to cross infection. The open window was not screened to protect against recontamination of instruments. The practice manager indicated action would be taken in respect of these matters.

Infection control audits were being completed on a regular basis. We found records were completed daily, to confirm various areas had been cleaned. However the provider may find it useful to note that there were no checklists or prompts to guide staff on some aspects of cleaning, including preparing the surgeries in between patients and cleaning the decontamination room.