University of Portsmouth Dental Academy

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We found this dental academy was providing well-led care in accordance 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 Shared direction and culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Freedom to speak up is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

We found staff to be open to discussion and feedback.

The dental academy staff demonstrated a transparent and open culture in relation to people’s safety.

Staff told us there was strong leadership with emphasis on people’s safety and continually striving to improve.

Staff told us they had clear responsibilities, roles and systems of accountability to support good governance and management.

Feedback from staff was obtained through meetings, surveys, and informal discussions. Staff were encouraged to offer suggestions for improvements to the service, and they said these were listened to and acted upon, where appropriate. For example, in response to staff feedback. Daily stand-up meetings were scheduled to start later in order to give staff time to prepare for the day.

Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued. We saw the dental academy had effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities.

Staff told us how they collected and responded to feedback from patients, the public and external partners.

The dental academy had taken steps to improve environmental sustainability. This included appointing sustainability champions to promote a culture of environmental responsibility both educationally and clinically. For example, staff trained first year students on haptic simulation machines to attain fine motor skills before they start to use plastic teeth for cavity preparation. Single use plastic mirrors on clinics were no longer used for when topical fluoride varnish was applied. Both of these initiatives reduced plastic waste.

Evidence was not available to confirm that the dental laboratories used by the academy, were registered with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). We have since received evidence to confirm this shortfall has been addressed.

Systems and processes were embedded, and staff worked together in such a way that the inspection did not highlight any significant issues or omissions.
Where the inspection identified areas which could be improved these were acted on immediately.

The information and evidence presented during the inspection was clear and well documented.

The dental academy had a governance system which included policies, protocols and procedures that were accessible to all members of staff and were reviewed on a regular basis.

Relevant protocols were not in place for the use of the closed-circuit television (CCTV) at the practice. Specifically, information for patients was not available to explain the purpose of the CCTV and the name and contact details of those operating the surveillance scheme was not displayed. We have since received evidence to confirm this shortfall has been addressed.

The dental academy had information governance arrangements and staff were aware of the importance of protecting patients’ personal information. Improvement was needed to ensure dental care records are only accessible to approved personnel when the service was closed to patients and students. We have since received evidence to confirm this shortfall has been addressed.

We saw there were clear and effective processes for identifying and managing risks, issues and performance.

The dental academy had systems to review and investigate incidents and accidents, and for receiving and acting on safety alerts.

The dental academy responded to concerns and complaints appropriately. Staff discussed outcomes to share learning and improve the service.

The dental academy had systems and processes for learning, quality assurance and continuous improvement. This included undertaking audits according to recognised guidance.
 

The judgement for Partnerships and communities is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Learning, improvement and innovation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.