Floss Dental Care

We carried out this announced inspection on 15 May 2019 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

Floss Dental Care is in Northampton, a town in the East Midlands. It provides mostly private treatments to adults and children. There is a small NHS contract to provide treatment for children.

There is level access for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. There is no car parking on site. There is on street public car parking spaces directly outside the practice.

The dental team includes two dentists, three dental nurses and one dental hygiene therapist. One of the dental nurses also works as a receptionist. The practice has one treatment room that is on ground floor level. There is a separate decontamination facility.

The practice is owned by an individual who is the principal dentist there. They have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the practice is run.

On the day of inspection, we collected 11 CQC comment cards filled in by patients.

During the inspection, we spoke with one dentist and two dental nurses. We looked at practice policies, patient feedback, practice procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open: Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday from 9am to 5pm and alternate Thursdays from 9am to 1pm.

Our key findings were:

• The practice appeared clean and well maintained.
• The provider had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance. Audit was undertaken annually rather than six monthly as recommended in guidance.
• Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available with some exceptions. Action was taken immediately to obtain required items.
• The practice had systems to help them manage risk to patients and staff.
• The provider had suitable safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.
• The provider had staff recruitment procedures that reflected legislation. We noted that references were absent in one staff file we viewed.
• 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.
• Staff were providing preventive care and supporting patients to ensure better oral health.
• The appointment system took account of patients’ needs.
• The provider had effective leadership and culture of continuous improvement.
• Staff felt involved and supported and worked well as a team.
• The provider asked staff and patients for feedback about the services they provided.
• The provider had systems to deal with complaints positively and efficiently.
• The provider had suitable information governance arrangements.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements. They should:

• Review staff awareness of the requirements of consent and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and ensure all staff are aware of their responsibilities as it relates to their role.
• Review the training, learning and development needs of individual staff members at appropriate intervals and ensure an effective process is established for the on-going assessment, supervision and appraisal of all staff.