You are here

Archived: Park Chambers Dental Practice

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 4 March 2013
Date of Publication: 25 April 2013
Inspection Report published 25 April 2013 PDF | 81.9 KB

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 4 March 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff and reviewed information we asked the provider to send to us.

Our judgement

Patient’s needs were assessed and care and treatment delivered in way that was intended to ensure their 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 needs. We reviewed four sets of patient records. They all contained up to date medical histories, an assessment of both the soft and hard tissues of the mouth with a mouth cancer risk assessment. This allowed treatment to be given in an appropriate and safe manner. One NHS patient records contained the required forms which were needed for consent and agreement to proceed with treatment. Private patients were also given written plans and estimates and these were stored electronically in their records. We saw these printed while we were in the reception area and later the patients we interviewed confirmed that they felt well informed about the treatment and its costs. We were additionally shown the record cards for three patients who had learning difficulties and saw that the parents were involved with the consent process at every stage.

We saw that patients are referred to other services where appropriate. We saw a case where a patient who was initially assessed to have gum disease and was referred to a hygienist for a more in depth assessment. The treatment provided was seen to be targeted appropriately towards this disease and a maintenance program established.

We saw from the records that good contemporaneous records were kept of treatment done and materials and drugs used. We saw examples of where x-rays had been taken. The reasons for taking them were recorded along with any comments and a report on what was found.

The dentist showed us the radiation protection file which contained a log of all the equipment, certificates of maintenance, staff training and a record of x-ray quality audits so that patients and staff can be assured that the equipment was well maintained.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. The medical emergency kit was inspected and the emergency drug box was in date and a system seen to keep it so. The drugs and equipment were compliant with the standard required by the British Resuscitation Council. One of the staff told us that the level of training they received was good and they felt confident to deal with an emergency should one occur.

We saw that a fire risk assessment had been carried out and appropriate alarms and equipment were present and serviced. We asked the receptionist what the procedures were in the event of a fire and she was able to tell us. There was a certificate of public liability.

Both surgeries were situated on the ground floor so that they were accessible to people with limited mobility.