You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 15 February 2013
Date of Publication: 29 May 2013
Inspection Report published 29 May 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 15 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

We spoke with three patients and were given a letter by a patient who had heard we were visiting the practice. All of these patients confirmed that they found the staff very friendly and helpful. They were full of praise for the service they had received. One patient said "The staff are more than helpful" and another said "They are fantastic - first rate". All patients said they found the practice clean and comfortable.

Patients were able to express their views. We saw that opportunity was provided for patients to provide feedback about the treatments they had received. This was originally done by means of a patient satisfaction questionnaire, where 30 patients at random were sent it after their treatment. The results from these questionnaires were analysed, discussed at practice meetings and acted upon where appropriate. Because of the fact that not all patients returned their questionnaires a different method was now practiced. On finishing treatment all patients were given a bag containing patient information about what to expect after surgery, information on commonly used medications prescribed, and practice information in general. A satisfaction questionnaire was now included in the bag asking for patient's to complete and hand back at their review appointment. This was proving to be much more reliable. We saw comments such as "I would never have a tooth taken out by anyone else" and "Great - thank you all".

Patient’s privacy was respected. We could see that confidentiality was being observed. We were told that any confidentiality issues would always be discussed away from the reception area if required. We saw ongoing training was provided.

Patients were given appropriate information and support regarding their treatment. Leaflets were available to patients describing future treatment options. We looked at a small sample of patient record cards. These recorded that medical histories had been updated and that treatment options were discussed. We saw that all patients were given a written treatment plan. This demonstrated that people were able to make informed choices about their treatment.