Queensgate Dental Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We found this practice was providing safe care in line with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Whilst there are issues to be addressed, the impact of our concerns relates to the governance and oversight of the risks, rather than a patient safety risk.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The practice identified and managed risks effectively and staff described the processes. This included sharps safety, sepsis awareness and lone working.

Staff demonstrated an open culture in relation to people’s safety. They felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and this was reflected in our findings.

Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines that were checked in line with national guidance. They knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely.

We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions.

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and most the required radiation protection information was available. However, radiography audits had not been carried out in line with requirements of the Ionising Radiation regulations 2017 (IRR) and Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) regulations 2017 (IR(ME)R). We do not assess compliance with IRR and the IR(ME)R but we do request services to provide evidence that demonstrates their compliance to inform our findings.

The practice managed fire safety well, and fire exits were clear and well signposted.

The practice had systems for appropriate and safe management of medicines.

At the time of the inspection, the practice did not have a recruitment policy or procedures in place that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff, including agency or locum staff. There were inconsistencies with Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks for all staff. For example, both receptionists did not have DBS checks in place, despite them acting as chaperones for some patients within the clinical setting. There was no risk assessment in place to mitigate risks related to no DBS checks being in place. Photographic identification was missing for some staff members.

In addition, there was no role specific structured induction for newly appointed staff.

The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover.

Staff demonstrated the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew how to escalate safeguarding concerns within the practice and externally. However, improvements were required to ensure staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. There were gaps in completion of mandatory training, including Safeguarding Adults and Children, Sepsis, Fire Safety, Learning Disability and Autism, and Mental Capacity training for multiple staff members.

Staff told us that there were enough staff on duty at all times.

Staff discussed their learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development during practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice.

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance.

Staff received appropriate training and demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes.

Staff used personal protective equipment and decontaminated dental instruments after use, in line with national guidance. We saw, and staff confirmed that single-use items were not reprocessed.

The practice had effective procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment and current guidance.

The practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste.

Equipment was maintained and serviced in line with manufacturers instructions.

The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance.

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.