You are here

Fartown Dental Practice - Huddersfield

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Updated 13 June 2016

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 31 March 2016 to ask the practice the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this practice was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this practice was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this practice was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Fartown Dental Practice – Huddersfield is situated in the Fartown area of Huddersfield, West Yorkshire. It offers mainly NHS treatment to patients of all ages but also offers private dental treatments. The services include preventative advice and treatment and routine restorative dental care.

The practice has four surgeries, a decontamination suite, one waiting area and a reception area. The reception area, waiting area and one surgery are on the ground floor. The other three surgeries are on the first floor. There are patient and staff toilet facilities on the first floor of the premises.

There are two dentists, three dental hygiene therapists, two qualified dental nurses, six trainee dental nurses and three receptionists. One of the qualified dental nurses also acts as the practice manager.

The opening hours are Monday to Friday from 8-00am to 6-00pm.

The practice owner is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as an individual. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the practice is run.

During the inspection we received feedback from 17 patients. The patients were generally positive about the care and treatment they received at the practice. Comments included that the staff were caring, respectful and professional. They also commented that the environment was clean, safe and hygienic and that they felt listened to.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice appeared clean and hygienic.
  • The practice had some systems in place to assess and manage risks to patients and staff including infection prevention, control and health and safety and the management of medical emergencies.
  • The decontamination and sterilisation processes were effective.
  • Staff had received training appropriate to their roles.
  • Patients were involved in making decisions about their treatment and were given clear explanations about their proposed treatment including costs, benefits and risks.
  • Oral health advice and treatment were provided in-line with the ‘Delivering Better Oral Health’ toolkit (DBOH).
  • We observed that patients were treated with kindness and respect by staff. Staff ensured there was sufficient time to explain fully the care and treatment they were providing in a way patients understood.
  • Patients were able to make routine and emergency appointments when needed.
  • The practice regularly audited clinical and non-clinical areas of the service.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

  • Review the availability of buccal midazolam in the emergency drug kit.
  • Review the availability of oropharyngeal airways in the emergency resuscitation kit.
  • Review the local rules for the X-ray machines to ensure they are updated and include the names of the current practitioners.
  • Review its complaint recording procedures to ensure that complaints are correctly logged and all documentation is kept.
  • Review the process for undertaking the Infection Prevention Society audit to ensure it is completed every six months.
Inspection areas

Safe

No action required

Updated 13 June 2016

We found that this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Staff told us they felt confident about reporting incidents, accidents and Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013 (RIDDOR).

Staff had received training in safeguarding at the appropriate level and knew the signs of abuse and who to report them to.

Staff were suitably qualified for their roles and the practice had undertaken the relevant recruitment checks to ensure patient safety.

Patients’ medical histories were obtained before any treatment took place. The dentists were aware of any health or medication issues which could affect the planning of treatment. Staff were trained to deal with medical emergencies. The emergency equipment and medicines were in date and generally in accordance with the British National Formulary (BNF) and Resuscitation Council UK guidelines. The medical emergency kit was missing buccal midazolam and oropharyngeal airways.

The decontamination procedures were effective and the equipment involved in the decontamination process was regularly serviced, validated and checked to ensure it was safe to use.

Effective

No action required

Updated 13 June 2016

We found that this practice was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Patients’ dental care records provided comprehensive information about their current dental needs and past treatment. The practice monitored any changes to the patient’s oral health and made referrals for specialist treatment or investigations where indicated.

The practice followed best practice guidelines when delivering dental care. These included Faculty of General Dental Practice (FGDP), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and guidance from the British Society of Periodontology (BSP). The practice focused strongly on prevention and the dentists were aware of the ‘Delivering Better Oral Health’ toolkit (DBOH) with regards to fluoride application and oral hygiene advice.

Staff were encouraged to complete training relevant to their roles and this was monitored by the registered provider. The clinical staff were up to date with their continuing professional development (CPD).

Referrals were made to secondary care services if the treatment required was not provided by the practice.

Caring

No action required

Updated 13 June 2016

We found that this practice was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

During the inspection we received feedback from 17 patients. Patients commented that staff were caring, respectful and professional. Patients also commented that they were involved in treatment options and everything was explained thoroughly.

We observed the staff to be welcoming and caring towards the patients.

We observed privacy and confidentiality were maintained for patients using the service on the day of the inspection.

Staff explained that enough time was allocated in order to ensure that the treatment and care was fully explained to patients in a way which they understood.

Responsive

No action required

Updated 13 June 2016

We found that this practice was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

The practice had an efficient appointment system in place to respond to patients’ needs. There were vacant appointments slots for urgent or emergency appointments each day.

Patients commented they could access treatment for urgent and emergency care when required. There were clear instructions for patients requiring urgent care when the practice was closed.

There was a procedure in place for responding to patients’ complaints. This involved acknowledging, investigating and responding to individual complaints or concerns. Staff were familiar with the complaints procedure. However, we noted that there was not a particularly efficient method for recording the details of complaints.

Well-led

No action required

Updated 13 June 2016

We found that this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

There was a clearly defined management structure in place and all staff felt supported and appreciated in their own particular roles. The practice manager and the practice owner were responsible for the day to day running of the practice.

The practice regularly audited clinical and non-clinical areas as part of a system of continuous improvement and learning.

They conducted patient satisfaction surveys, staff satisfaction surveys and were currently undertaking the NHS Friends and Family Test (FFT).