South Bar Dental Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We found this practice was providing well-led 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 Shared direction and culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Freedom to speak up is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The practice had a governance system that included policies and procedures that were accessible to staff and reviewed regularly. However, there was no formal process in place to provide assurance that staff had read, understood, and acknowledged new or revised policies. This meant the provider could not demonstrate that all staff were aware of and working in accordance with the most up-to-date guidance and procedures.

Systems and processes were embedded, and the inspection did not highlight significant issues or omissions. Areas requiring improvement were acted on immediately.

Staff were aware of the importance of protecting patients’ personal information. Electronic patient records were password protected, and records were stored securely in line with General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) requirements. However, we found that completed pages within the accident book had not been removed. This meant that personal information relating to previous incidents could be viewed by others, creating a risk to the confidentiality of staff and patient information.

There were effective processes for identifying and managing risks, investigating incidents and accidents, and for receiving and acting on safety alerts.

The practice had systems and processes for learning, quality assurance and continuous improvement. This included undertaking audits according to recognised guidance.

Concerns and complaints were responded to appropriately, and outcomes were discussed to share learning and for improvement.

We noted innovative approaches to delivering person-centred care. For example, the practice used tailored PowerPoint presentations to support discussions with patients about treatment options, including the benefits, risks, stages of treatment and examples of previous cases. Intraoral cameras were routinely used during examinations to help patients better understand their oral health and treatment needs. In addition, bespoke illustrations were used to explain complex procedures.

Staff feedback was obtained meetings and informal discussions. They were encouraged to offer suggestions for improvements to the service, and they said these were listened to and acted upon, where appropriate.

The practice gathered feedback from patients, members of the public and external partners and used this information to drive improvements. For example, patients provided feedback that the chairs in the waiting area were unstable and could tip easily. In response, the practice replaced them with more stable seating to improve patient comfort and safety.

The practice had taken steps to improve environmental sustainability. For example, staff were encouraged to switch off lights and equipment when not in use to reduce energy consumption. The practice also promoted recycling and ensured confidential waste was disposed of securely through shredding, helping to reduce waste and support environmentally sustainable working practices.

The judgement for Partnerships and communities is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.

The judgement for Learning, improvement and innovation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Well-led key question.