You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 26 June 2012
Date of Publication: 24 July 2012
Inspection Report published 24 July 2012 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

The provider was meeting this standard.

User experience

We did not speak to people using the service during our visit. However, we spoke to a number of people by telephone following our inspection. People we spoke with by telephone following our visit told us that proposed treatment was always discussed and that options were given.

Another person told us that they always asked about treatment planned and answers were always provided.

One person we spoke with on the phone told us that they had been referred to the service by their former dentist who had no longer been able to continue providing a service. They said “We have fallen on our feet. This is the best dentist I have been to.”

Other evidence

On arrival at the practice we found the premises to be clean and welcoming. The reception area and waiting room were separate allowing payment and appointment planning to take place in private.

In the waiting room, which provided ample seating and magazines and periodicals for clients to read, we found a wide variety of information relating to the services provided at the practice, the dental surgeons and other persons working at the service as well as dental advice leaflets.

Also in the waiting room was a notice inviting service users to make comment on their treatment. Forms, pens and a box were provided for comments to be left.

The complaints policy was clearly displayed on a notice board within the waiting room as was the service’s policies relating to consent, infection control and data protection.

During our inspection of the service we found that the practice had procedures in place to ensure the confidentiality of people using the service. We saw that the service had a clear confidentiality policy which had been fully implemented.

We were told by people with whom we spoke that they felt that their privacy was protected and that discussions around treatment took place in private.

We looked at the care records of people using the service and found that the records were computerised in a system which had been specifically adapted to suit the service and the needs of the people using the service.

The care records included full orthodontic charts, records of diagnostic tests carried out with the results and a cost estimate relating to the treatment offered. This cost estimate was provided to clients prior to treatment to allow them to make an informed decision about the proposed treatment.

Another person told us, “They don’t rush into things. All the treatment is carefully considered.”

Computerised records were backed up each day and, to protect data, a copy of the data was taken away from the premises each night.

During our inspection we saw a record of audits carried out and these included a record card audit by the National Health Service in relation to treatment planning and service user involvement.

We found, as a result of the records maintained and the policies and systems in place at the service, that people who use the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment.

Further evidence of the practice involving people using the service was provided by the use of questionnaires and surveys. Those we saw asked a broad range of questions and allowed for good feedback from people using the service. The surveys and questionnaires were distributed both by hand within the practice and by post. The practice has also recently started to set up an online survey system using an internet based survey provider. The system allows the service users to answer questions, set by the service, online and anonymously.