Queensgate Dental Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We found this practice was providing responsive 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 Person-centred Care is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Care provision, Integration and continuity is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Providing Information is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Listening to and involving people is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Equity in access is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The practice had not undertaken a disability access audit and did not have an action plan to demonstrate how it would continually improve accessibility for patients within the constraints of the premises. All organisations providing services to the public must audit their facilities and ensure they comply with the Equality Act 2010.

Staff were clear about the importance of providing emotional support to patients when delivering care. For example, notes were added to patients’ records to highlight individuals known to be anxious or requiring additional support. This allowed for extra time to be allocated during appointments to meet their needs. Members of staff had established long-standing relationships with many patients and told us they actively built rapports to understand and address any concerns patients may have prior to or during their appointments.

The practice supported more vulnerable members of society, for example, patients living with dementia or adults and children with a learning disability.

The practice displayed its opening hours and provided information on their website.

The frequency of appointments was agreed between the dentist and the patient, giving due regard to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines.

The practice provided telephone numbers for patients needing emergency dental treatment during the working day and when the practice was not open.

At the time of our inspection, patients who needed an urgent appointment were offered one in a timely manner. When the practice was unable to offer an urgent appointment, they worked with partner organisations to support urgent access for patients.

The judgement for Planning for the future is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.