You are here

We are carrying out a review of quality at Churchview Dental Practice. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Updated 9 March 2020

We carried out this announced inspection on 4 February 2020 under section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. We planned the inspection to check whether the registered provider was meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations. The inspection was led by a Care Quality Commission, (CQC), inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we always ask the following five questions:

• Is it safe?

• Is it effective?

• Is it caring?

• Is it responsive to people’s needs?

• Is it well-led?

These questions form the framework for the areas we look at during the inspection.

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found this practice was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found this practice was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found this practice was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found this practice was not providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Churchview Dental Practice is in Doncaster and provides private dental care and treatment for adults and children. The practice also holds a small NHS children’s contract.

There is level access to the practice for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. Car parking spaces are available near the practice.

The dental team includes two dentists, two dental nurses, one dental hygiene therapist and two receptionists. The team is supported by the practice manager. The practice is visited on an ad-hoc basis by an implantologist and an implant trained dental nurse. The practice has two treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by an individual who is the principal dentist there. They have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the practice is run.

On the day of inspection, we collected 28 CQC comment cards filled in by patients. All comments reflected positively on the service provided.

During the inspection we spoke with the principal dentist, two dental nurses, one receptionist and the practice manager. We looked at practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open:

Monday, Tuesday and Thursday 8:30am – 5:30pm.

Wednesday 8:30am – 12pm.

Friday 8:30am – 5pm.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice appeared to be visibly clean, tidy and well-maintained.
  • Improvement was needed to ensure infection control procedures reflected published guidance.
  • Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Not all medicines and life-saving equipment were available.
  • Improvement was needed to managing risk to patients and staff, for example, safer sharps, risk assessment, NHS prescription management and response to patient safety alerts.
  • The provider had safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.
  • The provider had staff recruitment procedures which reflected current legislation in most aspects. Disclosure and Barring Service checks were not risk assessed where appropriate.
  • Improvements could be made to ensure induction processes were in place for visiting staff.
  • The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
  • Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information.
  • Staff provided preventive care and supported patients to ensure better oral health.
  • The appointment system took account of patients’ needs.
  • Leadership and oversight of systems and processes could be improved.
  • The provider had systems to ensure continuous improvement; improvements could be made in this area.
  • Staff felt involved and supported and worked as a team.
  • The provider asked staff and patients for feedback about the services they provided.
  • The provider dealt with complaints positively and efficiently.
  • The provider had information governance arrangements.

We identified regulations the provider was not complying with. They must:

  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

Full details of the regulation the provider is not meeting are at the end of this report.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements. They should:

  • Take action to ensure sepsis awareness information and prompts for staff were visible to ensure early recognition, diagnosis and early management of sepsis.


Inspection areas

Safe

No action required

Updated 9 March 2020

Effective

No action required

Updated 9 March 2020

Caring

No action required

Updated 9 March 2020

Responsive

No action required

Updated 9 March 2020


Well-led

Improvements required

Updated 9 March 2020