Crofton Dental Care

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We found this practice was providing effective 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 Assessing needs is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The provider had systems to ensure that people who used the service received person-centred care and treatment, that was appropriate, met their needs and was reflective of their personal preferences. Preventive oral health care was encouraged.

Staff kept up-to-date with some current evidence-based practice. Improvements could be made to ensure up to date knowledge of relevant legislation and guidance was accessible, for example, antimicrobial prescribing and periodontal disease classification.

The practice offered conscious sedation for patients. The practice’s systems included checks before and after treatment, emergency equipment requirements, medicines management, sedation equipment checks, and staff availability and training. Improvements were required to ensure the staff directly involved with the delivery of conscious sedation received appropriate practical life support training. Additionally, a logbook of conscious sedation cases was not maintained. Guidance published by the Intercollegiate Advisory Committee for sedation in Dentistry (IACSD) states that sedation teams must maintain high quality full clinical records and a written or electronic clinical log.

We looked at 7 patient care records. The information recorded in these patient care records was broadly in line with recognised guidance. However, the provider should take action to ensure all clinicians take into account the guidance provided by the College of General Dentistry when completing dental care records. In particular, some clinical records had not been completed, meaning important information about people's care was missing. We saw evidence the dentists justified, graded and reported on the radiographs they took.

Staff obtained patients’ consent for treatment in line with legislation and guidance and understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff described how they involved patients’ relatives or carers when appropriate and made sure they had enough time to explain treatment options clearly.

The practice had systems for prescribing and dispensing of medicines. They carried out antimicrobial prescribing audits, however, improvement was required to ensure prescribing remained in line with current antimicrobial guidance.

Patients were referred to primary and secondary care specialists for treatment the practice did not provide. This included referring patients with suspected cancer under the national faster diagnosis pathways. The provider should implement a robust system for centrally monitoring all referrals to dental and healthcare professionals to ensure they are received, processed in a timely manner, and appropriately tracked to reduce the risk of referrals being delayed or lost.

The judgement for How staff, teams and services work together is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Supporting people to live healthier lives is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Monitoring and improving outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Consent to care and treatment is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.