You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 4 November 2013
Date of Publication: 6 December 2013
Inspection Report published 06 December 2013 PDF | 75.39 KB

People should get safe and appropriate care that meets their needs and supports their rights (outcome 4)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Experience effective, safe and appropriate care, treatment and support that meets their needs and protects their rights.

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 4 November 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare

Reasons for our judgement

The practice had two treatment rooms on the ground floor, one for the dentist’s use and the other for the hygienist to use. The waiting room was situated down two steps also on the ground floor and had comfortable seating. Leaflets explaining different treatments that the practice could offer were on display, as well as information on what to look for with physical ailments that affect the mouth.

The dentist told us that her mother used to own the practice and some patients had known her for a long time. One patient told us, “the dentist’s mother looked after me before” and “It is a lovely practice; I have recommended my friends to them.” Another person said, “we are always well looked after.”

People’s needs were assessed and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual plan. We saw in patient records that medical histories were updated every six months or when needs changed and were entered onto the person’s records; this meant that staff were aware of any relevant medical information that may affect the person’s treatment.

We saw evidence that risk assessments had been carried out, showing that all aspects of the premises were managed in a way that would maintain the safety of people using the service. We could see that all fire extinguishers had been serviced and all staff received training for fire safety and evacuation procedures. Staff regularly undertook fire drills to ensure the safety of the people using the service.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. Emergency medication was available along with emergency oxygen and appropriate equipment. We saw evidence that the staff had undergone First Aid training including resuscitation and the use of a defibrillator. There was a robust system in place to ensure all equipment and drugs were in date.

The treatment room had the equipment used for taking X rays. The local rules for the safe provision of this diagnostic tool were in place. They had been updated with the name of the dentist operating the equipment, and showed who was the Radiation Protection Supervisor (RPS) for the practice. They described the procedure to be followed and included the contact details for the Radiation Protection Adviser (RPA). The RPA is a qualified expert whose duty is to advise the practice on compliance with the Ionising Radiation Regulations 1999. We saw that the dentist had received training in radiography and radiation protection. We found that the practice had systems in place to maintain safety while taking X-rays.