You are here

Archived: Elmet Dental Care

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 March 2013
Date of Publication: 5 April 2013
Inspection Report published 5 April 2013 PDF

Before people are given any examination, care, treatment or support, they should be asked if they agree to it (outcome 2)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Where they are able, give valid consent to the examination, care, treatment and support they receive.
  • Understand and know how to change any decisions about examination, care, treatment and support that has been previously agreed.
  • Can be confident that their human rights are respected and taken into account.

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 12 March 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

Our judgement

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke with five people who had just seen their dentist. All told us they were satisfied with the way their treatment options were discussed with them. One person said “The dentist fully explained why I needed the treatment. We discussed the best way to go forward, including how much it would cost.”

People told us that the staff at the service were friendly, helpful and respectful. One person said “A lot of the staff have been here a long time.” Another added “The dentist is fantastic with the children.” They added that one of their children had visited a dentist for the first time that day and the dentist’s approach had helped their child to remain relaxed and happy during their examination.

We looked at four people’s care records and saw these stated that different treatment options had been discussed with the individuals. This enabled people to make informed choices. We saw ‘simple’ treatment plan records as well as a copy of a complex treatment plan sent to an individual. This explained the proposed treatment and associated costs so the individual could give the proposed treatment due consideration.

We spoke with three members of staff. All said the individual (patient) was given the final decision about whether to have any treatment. One dentist said “It’s the patient’s choice. We have a responsibility to tell them the benefits of the treatment we recommend, as well as the risks should they decide not to have the treatment. But it has to be their choice.”

We found the dentists spoken with had some understanding of how the Mental Capacity Act may affect the care and treatment they offered to vulnerable adults. They recognised that their explanation about a proposed treatment needed to be tailored to the individual, and their level of understanding. And that other people, like relatives and friends, could not give consent on their behalf except in certain circumstances.