Archived: The Village Dental Practice

Updated 24 December 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the practice was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

The inspection was carried out on 29/10/2015. The inspection was led by a dentally qualified CQC inspector, an inspection manager and a dental specialist advisor made up the inspection team.

We informed Healthwatch that we were inspecting the practice; we did not receive any information of concern from them. The provider is opening new premises; therefore our registration team had recently met with him. Our registration team reported no areas of concern following their meeting with the provider.

During our inspection we interviewed members of staff regarding their practise, policies and procedures. We spoke with people using the service and their relatives, observed the workings of the practice and reviewed their documentation.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we always ask the following five questions:

• Is it safe?

• Is it effective?

• Is it caring?

• Is it responsive to people’s needs?

• Is it well-led?

These questions therefore formed the framework for the areas we looked at during the inspection

Updated 24 December 2015

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 29 October 2015 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

The Village Dental Practice was a private dental practice situated in the new village of Great Denham on the outskirts of Bedford. It was situated on the first floor of the medical centre of the same name. There was lift access to the practice from the medical centre downstairs.

The practice has one surgery and offered a wide range of dental treatment, including the provision of dental implants and myofunctional orthodontics (this is where appliances, in conjunction with exercises, are used to train and modify the growth patterns of a child with crowded teeth, which may reduce the need to undergo conventional orthodontics), as well as general dentistry for adults and children. Intravenous sedation is offered and was carried out by a visiting medical anaesthetics provider who is registered with the Care Quality Commission.

The practice staff includes a principal dentist who works four days a week, a prosthodontist who visits monthly, an associate dentist who works at the practice six months of the year and a hygienist who works one day a week. These staff are supported by two qualified dental nurses, a practice manager and three other administrative staff. Following our visit we have received information that some of the staff working hours have altered.

The surgery is open from 9.00 am to 5.00pm on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday and from 10.00am to 6.00pm on Thursday

The principal dentist is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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 feedback from a total of 37 patients, all of which was overwhelmingly positive. Comments were made that the staff were friendly and caring, made them feel at ease and always treated them with dignity and respect. Patients commented on how involved they felt with their care and treatment options were always explained to them fully.

Our key findings were:

• The practice had systems in place to assess and manage risk to patients and staff.

• Patients were treated with care, dignity and respect.
• Patients were involved in decisions about their care.
• There was good communication between the practice staff, who worked as a team
• The practice demonstrated a good understanding of child protection and safeguarding vulnerable adults.

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

• Increase the frequency of the infection control audits from yearly to six monthly in line with the requirements of Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices (HTM01-05)
• Arrange an external risk assessment of the risk of Legionella contamination, with particular reference to the dental water lines.
• Monitor and record the temperatures of the fridge where a temperature sensitive medication is stored.
• Arrange for staff to undertake training in Mental Capacity Act 2005.