De-ientes Bedford

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We found this practice was providing safe care in line with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The practice identified and managed most risks effectively and staff described the processes. This included sharps safety. Improvements could be made to ensure all staff had sepsis training and a risk assessment for lone working. Additionally, we saw that the health and safety risk assessment was for both this practice and also a neighbouring practice and so was not specific to this location. The practice told us this would be updated.

Staff demonstrated an open culture in relation to people’s safety. They felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice.

Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines that were checked in line with national guidance. However, we saw that there was no portable suction available. Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

Staff providing treatment to patients under sedation had also completed immediate life support training.

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely.

We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions.

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available. This included cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). We saw that not all actions from the most recent radiation report had been completed. The practice told us these would be completed.

We saw that the fire alarms had been serviced yet the arising actions had not been completed. Following this feedback, we saw that this had been arranged. We saw that whilst fire drills were being carried out, they were not evaluated and any possible improvements discussed. Additionally, the emergency lighting had not been serviced, and the fire alarms had not been tested since November 2025. Following this feedback, the practice told us that fire drills would now be evaluated and the fire alarms would be tested on a weekly basis. The practice should ensure that ongoing fire safety management is effective.

NHS prescription pads were kept securely, and a log was in place to monitor and track their use.
 

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff, however improvements were required to ensure all the necessary information had been received; for example, not all staff had evidence of immunity to hepatitis B or evidence of conduct in previous employment. We also saw that several Disclosure and Barring Service certificates were dated after announcement of this inspection.

The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover.

Newly appointed staff had an appropriate role specific structured induction.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were enough staff on duty at all times. They demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew how to escalate safeguarding concerns within the practice and externally.

The practice did not have complete oversight that all staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. We saw that not all staff had evidence of safeguarding, fire or learning disability and autism training. The practice told us this would be completed.

Staff discussed their learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development during annual appraisals, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice.
 

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance.

Most staff received appropriate training and demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes.

Staff used personal protective equipment and decontaminated dental instruments after use, in line with national guidance. We saw, and staff confirmed that single-use items were not reprocessed.

The practice had effective procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment and current guidance. However, improvements were required to ensure all actions arising from the risk assessment were completed.

The practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste.

Equipment was maintained and serviced in line with manufacturers’ instructions.

The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance.
 

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.