You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 20 June 2013
Date of Publication: 19 July 2013
Inspection Report published 19 July 2013 PDF | 84.93 KB

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

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 20 June 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

Reasons for our judgement

Patients told us they were asked their views about the service in person. The practice manager showed us a testimonial page on their website with patient comments such as "The dentist has always been very caring and reassuring", "Very professional, friendly and caring" and "Treatment received is thorough and competent". The practice had carried out a patient survey in 2012. The comments were mostly positive and where suggestions had been documented, the practice had taken action to implement improvements to the service. For example, the provision of a media board with further information for patients and the waiting room being decorated.

The practice had regular staff meeting to discuss the service offered to patients. We saw minutes of practice meetings, which confirmed that regular updates of staff training took place, regularly discussing and reviewing their practices to improve the patient experience in respect of the 'essential standards of quality and safety' at the service. For example, care and treatment and cleanliness and infection control.

We saw fire protocols in all patient areas to give the dental team guidance about how to support the safe evacuation of patients in the event of a fire. We saw records that the practice had carried out the necessary monitoring and servicing of equipment in April 2013, which included fire alarms and fire hydrants. We saw evidence of a 2013 fire risk assessment with action taken in respect of its findings. For example, the emergency oxygen cylinder had been relocated to a safer location within a treatment room to further minimise the risk of fire. We saw the practice had carried out a full fire drill in January 2013.

The provider took account of complaints. There was a complaints policy in place with clear information regarding the practice's processes and timeframes to respond to a complaint. The provider told us they had not received any formal complaints, however, one patient's minor concern had been resolved locally with the dentist involved.

We saw compliment cards patients had written about the treatment they had received from the practice. For example, "Thank you for giving my smile back" and "Thank you for looking after me so gently".

We saw a number of audits to assess and monitor the practice processes. For example, x-ray audits and an audit in March 2013 regarding patient information accuracy, which we saw 90% accuracy evidenced for the sample taken. This was achieved by moving from completing initial consultation patient information to checking patient details at every visit to the practice.

The provider told us that accidents and incidents were logged alongside patient's notes and that there had been no recent accident or incidents in the practice.