You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 20 May 2014
Date of Publication: 17 June 2014
Inspection Report published 17 June 2014 PDF

People should be cared for in a clean environment and protected from the risk of infection (outcome 8)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Providers of services comply with the requirements of regulation 12, with regard to the Code of Practice for health and adult social care on the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.

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 May 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment. There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

Reasons for our judgement

Effective infection prevention and control plays an important part in ensuring that the service provided to people is safe. The Department of Health published an updated document in March 2013 called the Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices (HTM01-05). It sets out in detail the processes and practices essential to the prevention of infections and to deliver clean, safe care.

During our inspection on 30 September 2013 we identified that some improvements were needed in infection prevention and control (IPC) at Lynbridge Dental Practice. This was because the layout of the decontamination room did not support a flow of work that moved consistently from dirty to clean. Some sterilised instruments had to be placed back into the dirty area to be bagged.

When we carried out a follow up inspection at Lynbridge Dental Practice on 20 May 2014 we found that the provider had taken effective action to remedy this. The provider told us that some structural alterations had been made shortly after our previous inspection, to enable necessary improvements to the layout of the decontamination room. We saw that a hand washing sink for staff had been relocated and was now installed at the beginning of the decontamination process, as recommended in HTM01:05. Other items such as an autoclave and a clinical waste bin had also been relocated to support a continuous workflow from dirty to clean. We spoke with a member of staff dedicated to work in the decontamination area and observed them working through a decontamination process. They told us that the new layout worked better. We saw that there was a clear diagram on display which detailed the process and the dirty to clean work flow for staff.

During our previous inspection we had found that the practice was not carrying out regular audits of infection prevention and control (IPC). During our latest inspection on 20 May 2014 we spoke with the dentist who had taken on the role of IPC lead. They told us that audits had been carried out with greater frequency and they were also introducing a new monthly cleanliness audit, which would commence at the end of May 2013. (The practice was visibly clean during our visit.) We saw records which showed that IPC audits had been carried out in October 2013, and in January and April 2014. The practice’s audit compliance score had increased from 90% to 98%. The last audit had identified that hand hygiene training required updating. We were told that this would be held at a team meeting in June 2014.

Overall we found that the provider had taken positive steps to improve the prevention and control of infection. This supported the delivery of a safe service.