You are here

Dr Claire Rumley - Stratford Road

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Updated 19 July 2016

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 17 May 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

Claire Rumley dental practice is a small NHS dental practice located in the Hall Green area of Birmingham. The provider, Claire Rumley is one of three dentists who work in the same building under a separate registration with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). Some of the facilities and staff are shared between each practice located in the building. For example the receptionist, reception area, toilets, staff room, waiting area and first floor X-ray facilities are used by all three dental practices under an expense sharing agreement. This report will make references to the practice but this inspection only related to the services provided by Dr Claire Rumley.

The practice is located on the ground floor, with one treatment room and provides regulated dental services to both adults and children. Three qualified dental nurses and a receptionist work alongside the dentist. The practice’s opening hours are: Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday: 8.30am to 5.30pm; and Wednesday: 8.30am to 1pm.

The dentist is registered with the 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.

We received positive feedback from 52 patients about the services provided. This was through CQC comment cards left at the practice prior to the inspection and by speaking with patients in the practice.

Our key findings were:

  • Systems were in place for the recording and learning from significant events and accidents.
  • There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of patients.
  • The practice had the necessary equipment for staff to deal with medical emergencies, and staff had been trained how to use that equipment. This included an automated external defibrillator, oxygen and emergency medicines.
  • Feedback from patients about their experiences at the practice was positive. Patients said they were treated with dignity and respect.
  • The dentist identified the treatment options, and discussed these with patients.
  • The practice was visibly clean and well maintained.
  • The practice followed the relevant guidance from the Department of Health's: ‘Health Technical Memorandum 01-05 (HTM 01-05) for infection control with regard to cleaning and sterilizing dental instruments.
  • There was a whistleblowing policy accessible to all staff. Staff were aware of procedures to follow if they had any concerns.
  • The appointment system met the needs of patients and waiting times were kept to a minimum.

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

  • Review the current legionella risk assessment and implement the required actions including the monitoring and recording of water temperatures, giving due regard to the guidelines issued by the Department of Health - Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices and The Health and Social Care Act 2008: ‘Code of Practice about the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.
  • Review its responsibilities as regards to the Control of Substance Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations 2002, ensure all documentation is up to date and staff understand how to minimise risks associated with the use of and handling of these substances.
  • Review procedures to ensure that the practice is in compliance with its legal obligations under Ionising Radiation Regulations (IRR) 99 and Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulation (IRMER) 2000.
  • Review the storage of dental care records to ensure this is secure in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.
  • Review its responsibilities to the needs of people with a disability and the requirements of the equality Act 2010 and ensure a Disability Discrimination Act audit is undertaken for the premises.
Inspection areas

Safe

No action required

Updated 19 July 2016

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

Systems were in place for recording significant events and accidents. Staff were aware of the procedure to follow to report incidents, accidents and Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013 (RIDDOR).

Arrangements were in place to ensure that the practice received Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) alerts.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff working at the practice. The practice had undertaken the relevant recruitment checks to ensure patient safety. Staff had received safeguarding training and were aware of their responsibilities regarding safeguarding children and vulnerable adults.

The practice had emergency medicines and oxygen available. Regular checks were being completed to ensure emergency equipment was in good working order.

The practice had infection control procedures to ensure that patients were protected from potential risks. Regular audits of the decontamination process were as recommended by the current guidance.

X-ray equipment was regularly serviced to make sure it was safe for use.

Effective

No action required

Updated 19 July 2016

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

The practice used oral screening tools to identify oral disease. All patients were clinically assessed by the dentist before any treatment began. Patients and staff told us that explanations about treatment options and oral health were given to patients in a way they understood.

The practice was following National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines for the care and treatment of dental patients. Particularly in respect of patient recalls, lower wisdom tooth removal and the prescribing of antibiotics for patients at risk of infective endocarditis (a condition that affects the heart).

Staff received professional training and development appropriate to their roles and learning needs. Qualified staff were registered with the General Dental Council (GDC) and were meeting the requirements of their professional registration.

Caring

No action required

Updated 19 July 2016

We found that this practice was providing caring services in accordance with

the relevant regulations.

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

Patients said staff were welcoming, polite and professional. Feedback identified that the practice treated patients with dignity and respect. We observed staff treating

patients with kindness and respect and were aware of the importance of confidentiality.

Patients said they received good dental treatment and they were involved in discussions about their dental care.

Responsive

No action required

Updated 19 July 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. Patients said they were easily able to get an appointment. Patients confirmed that they urgent appointments available on the day that they phoned the practice.

The practice had access for patients with restricted mobility; the treatment room was on the ground floor, although X-ray facilities were located on the first floor. The practice did not have a hearing induction loop to help those patients with hearing difficulties.

There was a procedure in place for responding to patients’ complaints The practice’s complaints policy was available to patients in the waiting room.

Well-led

No action required

Updated 19 July 2016

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

Staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities within the dental team, and knew who to speak with if they had any concerns.

The practice was carrying out regular audits of both clinical and non-clinical areas to assess the safety and effectiveness of the services provided.

Patients were able to express their views and comments, and the practice listened to those views and acted upon them.

Staff said that they felt well supported and could raise any issues or concerns with the registered person. We were told that the practice was a friendly place to work and everyone worked well as a team. Regular formal and informal practice meetings were held and staff said that they were kept up to date with any relevant information relating to the practice.