• Dentist
  • Dentist

Archived: Saxon Dental Clinic

Unit 2 Saxon Gate, Back Of The Walls, Southampton, Hampshire, SO14 3HA (023) 8022 6187

Provided and run by:
KMP Dental Ltd

All Inspections

18 September 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This was a follow-up inspection to check the provider's progress against areas where we found non-compliance on our previous inspection visit on 19 June 2013; we found the arrangements for the management of medicines were not adequate. There was no effective system in place for the safe recording of stock levels of medicines that were dispensed to patients. There was no clear procedure to monitor and review the handling of medicines. We also checked the training and support system in place to support the staff as the provider was not compliant at the last inspection.

We did not speak with any patients during this follow-up inspection as we were reviewing the actions the provider had taken to become compliant. At this inspection we found the provider had developed systems for the management of medicines in order to ensure this was carried out safely. We found records of training for the staff had been developed and the staff were supported to undertake training and personal development. This was as part of their requirement to maintain their registration with the General Dental Council.

19 June 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

This was a follow-up inspection to check the provider's progress against areas where we found non-compliance on our previous inspection visit 24 and 28 January 2013. We looked for improvements in the service's procedures and systems for cleanliness and infection control. We checked to see if the provider had addressed concerns with the recruitment of staff, safeguarding from abuse, medicine management and quality assurance. We spoke with a member of staff, one of the dentists and the registered manager. (The provider is the registered manager and is referred to as the provider throughout the report). We did not speak with people who used the service during this follow-up inspection as we were reviewing the management of systems.

We found that systems were in place for the prevention and control of infection and other monitoring of the service took place to check the quality of the service. Staff were aware of their role and of action they needed to take if abuse was suspected. Checks were in place to ensure all staff employed at the clinic had been suitably checked. Although we found evidence that staff had received training the provider had not demonstrated that an affective monitoring system was in place to ensure the range of training was comprehensive. There were some arrangements in place for the management of medicines. However this was not adequate.

24, 28 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We were only able to speak with one patient on one of our visits to the clinic. They told us they had been with the same dentist for a number of years and had moved practices when the dentist moved. They said they were very pleased with the treatment they received and had confidence in the staff and dentist. The patient confirmed that they did not have to wait long for an appointment in an emergency. The patient did tell us that they had previously received a treatment plan and signed a consent form but could not remember when they received one for this course of treatment.

We found that people were given appropriate information and choices about their treatment options: however, this was not always clearly documented. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that ensured patients' safety and welfare. There were ineffective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. The provider did not have an effective system in place for the safe recording of stock levels of medicines that were prescribed for patients.

Staff were appropriately trained and maintained high standards of care. However, the provider was unable to demonstrate how they would check this. Patients who used the service were not sufficiently protected from the risk of abuse and there were not sufficient systems in place to regularly monitor and review the quality and safety of treatment provided to patients.