• Dentist
  • Dentist

Archived: Village Dental Practice

23 Farnham Drive, Caversham Park Village, Reading, Berkshire, RG4 6NY (0118) 947 9666

Provided and run by:
Mr. Stephen Young

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

10 November 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We undertook a follow up focused inspection of Village Dental Practice on 10 November 2022.

This inspection was carried out to review, in detail, the actions taken by the registered provider to improve the quality of care and to confirm that the practice was now meeting legal requirements.

The inspection was carried out by a Care Quality Commission, (CQC) inspector.

At our inspection on 11 March 2022 we found the registered provider was not providing well-led care and was in breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

You can read our report of that inspection by selecting the 'all reports' link for Village Dental Practice on our website www.cqc.org.uk.

As part of this inspection we asked:

• Is it well-led?

When one or more of the five questions are not met, we require the service to make improvements and send us an action plan. We then inspect again after a reasonable interval, focusing on the area where improvement was required.

Are services well-led?

We found this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations. The provider had made improvements in relation to the regulatory breach we found at our inspection on 11 March 2022.

Background

Village Dental Practice is in Reading and provides NHS and private dental care and treatment for adults and children.

There is step free access to the practice for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. Car parking spaces, including parking for disabled people, are available near the practice. The practice has made adjustments to support patients with additional access requirements.

The dental team includes three dentists, two dental nurses, one trainee dental nurse, a receptionist and a practice manager.

The practice has two treatment rooms.

During the inspection we spoke with two dentists, two dental nurses and the practice manager. We looked at practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open:

  • Monday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Tuesday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Wednesday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Thursday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Friday 9.00am to 5.00pm

The practice is closed for lunch between 1.00pm and 2.00pm daily.

Our key findings were:

  • The provider had quality assurance processes to encourage learning and continuous improvement.

These improvements showed the provider had taken action to improve the quality of services for patients and comply with the regulations when we carried out a follow-up focused inspection on 11 March 2022.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements.

  • Implement protocols regarding the prescribing and recording of antibiotic medicines taking into account guidance provided by the Faculty of General Dental Practice in respect of antimicrobial prescribing.

11 March 2022

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out this announced focused inspection on 11 March 2022 under section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions.

We planned the inspection to check whether the registered practice was meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations. The inspection was led by a Care Quality Commission, (CQC), inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we usually ask five key questions, however due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and to reduce time spent on site, only the following three questions were asked:

• Is it safe?

• Is it effective?

• Is it well-led?

These questions form the framework for the areas we look at during the inspection.

Our findings were:

  • The practice was clean and well-maintained.
  • The provider’s infection control procedures were not operated effectively
  • Appropriate life-saving equipment was available.
  • The provider did not operate effective systems to help them manage risk to patients and staff.
  • The provider had safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.
  • The provider’s staff recruitment procedures required improvement.
  • The clinicians provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
  • Staff provided preventive care and supported patients to ensure better oral health.
  • The provider did not have a culture of continuous improvement.
  • The provider’s information governance arrangements were operated effectively.

Background

Village Dental Practice is in Reading and provides NHS and private dental care and treatment for adults and children.

There is level access to the practice for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. Car parking spaces, including parking for disabled people, are available near the practice. The practice has made adjustments to support patients with additional access requirements.

The dental team includes three dentists, two dental nurses, one trainee dental nurse, a receptionist and a practice manager.

The practice has two treatment rooms.

During the inspection we spoke with two dentists, two dental nurses and the practice manager. We looked at practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open:

  • Monday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Tuesday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Wednesday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Thursday 9.00am to 5.00pm
  • Friday 9.00am to 5.00pm

The practice is closed for lunch between 1.00pm and 2.00pm daily.

We identified regulations the provider was not complying with. They must:

  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

Full details of the regulation the provider was not meeting are at the end of this report.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements. They should:

  • Implement a system to ensure patient referrals to other dental or health care professionals are centrally monitored to ensure they are received in a timely manner and not lost.

  • Take action to ensure the clinicians take into account the guidance provided by the College of General Dentistry when completing dental care records.

  • Take action to ensure dentists are aware of the guidelines issued by the British Endodontic Society for the use of rubber dam for root canal treatment.

  • Implement audits for prescribing of antibiotic medicines taking into account the guidance provided by the College of General Dentistry.

  • Implement practice protocols and procedures to ensure staff are up to date with their mandatory training and their continuing professional development.

During a check to make sure that the improvements required had been made

The service sent us evidence that hygiene and infection control checks and audits were undertaken. We saw improvements were identified through an audit tool. We found plans were in place for working towards best practice in national guidance for dental practice decontamination.

14 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with four people who use this service, a dentist, a dental nurse and the registered manager of the service during this inspection.

Patients said they were able to arrange appointments when they needed to. They said they were offered choices of treatment and made aware of the relevant costs and NHS treatment bands. We saw information on treatment prices was available at the reception area. The prices were based on the NHS treatment bands.

Patient records contained information on medical history and patients told us they were asked for updates on their health whenever they came for appointments. Patient records contained oral health assessments, treatment plans and notes on people's medical conditions. Dentists had access to patient records in treatment rooms via an electronic system.

The service met the essential standards for decontaminating dental instruments. The practice was clean and staff said they were aware of their responsibilities to prevent infections. However there was no formal system of audit for hygiene and infection control.

Clinical staff received the appropriate professional development in order to meet the requirements of their registration with the General Dental Council. Staff received appraisal and attended relevant training. We saw documented checks and vaccinations were undertaken for staff who were at potential risk of health care associated infections, such as hepatitis B.