You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 25 November 2016

During a routine inspection

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 25 November 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 Dr Shenas Dental Clinc and provides private dental services. The opening hours for the practice were Monday to Friday 8.00am to5.30pm.

The premises consist of a treatment rooms, that encompasses the decontamination, a waiting areas and reception area.

The practice comprises of a principal dentist, a dentist, a nurse and a receptionist.

The principal dentist is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as an individual registered person. 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 asked patients to complete CQC comment cards and we spoke to patients on the day of the inspection. s.We received feedback from 14 patients. The patients who provided feedback were positive about the care and treatment they received at the practice. They told us they were involved in all aspects of their care and found the staff to be caring and helpful and they were treated with care, dignity and respect.

Our key findings were:

  • There were effective processes in place to reduce and minimise the risk and spread of infection.
  • Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned in line with current guidance such as from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Patients were involved in their care and treatment planning.
  • There was appropriate equipment for staff to undertake their duties and equipment was well maintained.
  • Staff were trained in and there was appropriate equipment for them to respond to medical emergencies.
  • Patients told us that staff were caring and treated them with dignity and respect.
  • Patients indicated that they felt they were listened to and that they received good care from a helpful and caring practice team.
  • There were processes in place for patients to give their comments and feedback about the service including making complaints and compliments.

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

  • Review the practice’s system for the recording, investigating and reviewing incidents or significant events with a view to preventing further occurrences and, ensuring that improvements are made as a result

  • Review the protocol for completing accurate, complete and detailed records relating to employment of staff.

  • Review staff awareness of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and ensure all staff are aware of their responsibilities under the Act as it relates to their role.
  • Review it’s responsibilities as regards to the Control of Substance Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations 2002 and, 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 availability of medicines and equipment to manage medical emergencies giving due regard to guidelines issued by the Resuscitation Council (UK), and the General Dental Council (GDC) standards for the dental team.

Inspection carried out on 16 January 2012

During a routine inspection

People who use the service were not available for interview during our visit. There were questionnaires and other information that people had completed. These told us that people were happy with the service provided. They felt they were given enough information about their treatment options and the relevant fees and were able to ask all the questions they wanted to. They found the staff to be friendly and reported that they were treated with respect and their privacy was maintained. They said that the clinic environment was clean in all areas.