The Care Quality Commission
  • Dentist
  • Dentist

Smilepod - 18 Cullum Street

18 Cullum Street, London, EC3M 7JJ (020) 7836 6866

Provided and run by:
Smile Pod Limited

All Inspections

10 April 2018

During a routine inspection

We carried out this announced inspection on 10 April 2018 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. We planned the inspection to check whether the registered provider was meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations. The inspection was led by a CQC inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we always ask the following five questions:

• Is it safe?

• Is it effective?

• Is it caring?

• Is it responsive to people’s needs?

• Is it well-led?

These questions form the framework for the areas we look at during the inspection.

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this practice was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this practice was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this practice was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Smilepod – 18 Cullum Street is in Bank and provides private treatment to patients of all ages.

There is no level access for people who use wheelchairs and pushchairs. The practice have a branch surgery in close proximity. All patients requiring wheelchair access are directed to the other branch and seen there.

The dental team includes five dentists (including an orthodontist and periodontist), four dental nurses, three dental hygienists, one dental hygiene therapist and a practice manager. The practice manager and dental nurses provided reception cover. The practice has three treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by a company and as a condition of registration must have a person registered with the Care Quality Commission as the registered manager. Registered managers have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the practice is run. The registered manager at Smilepod – 18 Cullum Street is the practice manager.

On the day of inspection we collected eight CQC comment cards filled in by patients. This information gave us a positive view of the practice.

During the inspection we spoke with two dentists, two dental nurses, the dental hygiene therapist and the practice manager. We looked at practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open: Monday to Thursday from 8.30am to 7.00pm; Fridays from 8.30am to 5.00pm and on Saturdays from 10.00am to 4.00pm.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice was clean and well maintained.
  • The practice had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance.
  • Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available.
  • The practice had systems to help them manage risk.
  • The practice had suitable safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding adults and children.
  • The practice had thorough staff recruitment procedures.
  • The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
  • Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information.
  • The appointment system met patients’ needs.
  • The practice had effective leadership. Staff felt involved and supported and worked well as a team.
  • The practice asked staff and patients for feedback about the services they provided.
  • The practice dealt with complaints positively and efficiently.

10 July 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

In response to our previous inspection in December 2013 the provider had implemented clear systems to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

An infection control audit and risk assessment had been completed and areas for development had been identified.

The records to check the autoclave (sterilising machine) was working correctly were accessible and staff spoken with demonstrated a clear understanding of how to monitor these checks. Sterilised instruments now included a record of who had completed the sterilisation process to ensure a clear audit trial was maintained.

The provider had also addressed our concerns regarding unsafe recruitment practices by ensuring all staff had a disclosure and barring service (DBS) check and the introduction of a formal contract for all dentists.

17 December 2013

During a routine inspection

Four dentists worked at the practice supported by two dental nurses and the practice manager. On the day of our visit we observed staff with people using the service and observed two of the dentists providing care to four people. We spoke to six people about their treatment and care all, of whom were very satisfied with the treatment they received. One person said that they had had plenty of information about what to expect and that their course of treatment was going well. Another person told us 'it's very straight forward here ' efficient; the staff are really nice.' People said that the treatment was good and the staff were very helpful and efficient.

We saw that people's views and choices about their treatment were respected and treatment was provided in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

We found that people were treated by staff who were qualified to do so although the provider had not carried out all the required checks on people they employed or who worked at the practice on a self-employed basis.

Although we were told that all the required procedures were in place to protect people from the risk of infection, we found that some measures required by the codes of practice were not being carried out.

We saw that the practice had an effective complaints system in place and that any concerns people expressed were dealt with promptly and effectively.