Platt Bridge Dental Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We found this practice was providing safe 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 Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The practice identified and managed risks effectively and staff described the processes. This included sharps safety, sepsis awareness and lone working. We noted the sharps injury poster needed to be updated to reflect protocols for the practice if a sharps injury occurred. The provider acted immediately and created a new injury process on the inspection day.

Staff demonstrated an open culture in relation to people’s safety. They felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and this was reflected in our findings.

Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines that were checked in line with national guidance. They knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter.

Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely. However, risk assessments relating to the safe storage and handling of all the substances hazardous to health had not been reviewed or updated for over 10 years. We discussed this with the provider, who gave assurance that all relevant risk assessments would be reviewed and updated within the next 4 weeks.

We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions.

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available.

The practice managed fire safety well, and fire exits were clear and well signposted. The practice was in the process of addressing recommendations documented in an external fire risk assessment. We noted some documentation relating to the oversight of fire drills had not always been completed and the emergency lighting was not being tested each month. We discussed this with the provider who assured us this would be addressed and improvements made.

The practice had systems for appropriate and safe management of medicines. NHS prescription pads were kept securely, and a log was in place to monitor and track their use.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff.

The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover.

On the day of inspection, we checked 6 recruitment files. We noted that pre-employment checks, including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were not carried out for 3 members of staff before they commenced employment at the practice. Hepatitis B titre levels had not been obtained for 2 members of the clinical staff. Titre levels are required to indicate levels of antibodies following a vaccination to ensure the vaccine has been effective. The practice should ensure they consistently follow their recruitment policies and procedures, to ensure that appropriate checks are completed prior to new staff commencing employment at the practice.

Newly appointed staff had an appropriate role specific structured induction.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were enough staff on duty at all times.

Staff demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew how to escalate safeguarding concerns within the practice and externally. However, they were unclear of their responsibilities regarding the oversight of Was Not Brought within the practice. Was Not Brought is a process for when a child or an adult, who is reliant on another person to get an appointment, has missed their appointment. Missed appointments can be a sign of neglect and therefore providers should have appropriate safeguarding systems and processes to monitor and have oversight of missed appointments, particularly for children and vulnerable adults.

The practice ensured staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals.

There were effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities. Staff discussed their learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development during annual appraisals, one-to-one meetings, during clinical supervision and practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice.

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance. Staff received appropriate training and demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes. We noted that environmental cleaning logs were not being completed by practice staff. We discussed this with the provider who gave assurance that these logs would be implemented and completed from now on.

Staff used personal protective equipment and decontaminated dental instruments after use, in line with national guidance. We saw, and staff confirmed that single-use items were not reprocessed. The practice had effective procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment and current guidance.

The practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste.

Equipment was maintained and serviced in line with manufacturers’ instructions. The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance.

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.