You are here

Mydentist - Mount Avenue - New Milton

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 26 June 2013
Date of Publication: 30 July 2013
Inspection Report published 30 July 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 26 June 2013, checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s dignity was respected and their views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service understood, expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about the care and treatment choices available to them.

The provider had an information brochure about the practice. It included details about available treatments, appointments, emergencies and opening hours.

There were a range of posters and other material on display in the waiting area. They included information about the registered provider, their complaints procedure, NHS costs and fees for treatment provided under private arrangements.

People we spoke with told us their dentist explained what they were doing when they carried out checks ups or provided dental treatment. One person said, “I like the way he shows you what is wrong using a mirror, you can see why you need a filling”.

Our observations of four people who received either a check-up or treatment confirmed what people told us. We saw people were given comprehensive details about any problems, treatment options and costs to enable them to make an informed decision about any treatment they required.

We also saw that people were provided with a treatment plan that included costs and advised to take time to think about options before making a final decision.

This all showed that people who used the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment.

We spoke with the senior dental nurse who had lead responsibility for infection prevention and control at the practice. They told us that if they knew a person had a blood borne virus they would not treat them any differently to other patients. They said this was because the universal infection control procedures followed by the practice meant it was unnecessary. This showed that people were not subject to discrimination.

There was a ramp at the rear of the practice premises to provide easy access for wheelchair users and there were also two treatment rooms on the ground floor of the practice. The reception desk had two levels with a lower level that enabled wheelchairs users to see and communicate easily with reception staff. A suitable toilet was available for wheelchair users. It had been fitted with grab rails in order to promote people’s independence and safety.

Other features that showed the provider promoted diversity, equality and human rights included the following.

There was an induction loop system in the premises that had been installed to assist people with hearing problems.

The provider’s written policies and procedures included policies about, equality and diversity, confidentiality, disability and consent to examination and treatment. We also saw that a policy about safeguarding vulnerable adults included reference to best interests decisions made on behalf of people who lacked capacity.

Although the reception and waiting areas were open plan staff told us that if people wanted to discuss any issues in private this could be done in treatment rooms.

People said if they needed urgent treatment this was arranged quickly. They also told us that it was easy to make appointments for treatment at times convenient to them. We noted that the practice opening hours were from 08:00 to 20:00 hours. One person told us they thought the speed with which an appointment could be arranged was better that their GP. Several people told us they thought the opening hours were particularly helpful for those in employment.