Wilton Dental Care

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 line with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Although there are issues to be addressed, the impact of our concerns relates to the governance and the oversight of the risks, rather than a patient safety risk.

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 risks associated with sharps safety and sepsis had been considered within the general health and safety risk assessment, but improvements were required to ensure the risks associated with lone working had been fully assessed and mitigated.

Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines and they had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support. However, some items within the medical emergency kit had expired, and in-house checks had not recognised this. This included buccal midazolam (which is an emergency medicine used to treat prolonged seizures), and masks and self-inflating bags which are used to administer oxygen. The battery for the automated external defibrillator (AED) had expired in 2021. An AED is used to treat people experiencing sudden cardiac arrest. Following our inspection, the practice provided evidence that the expired items had been purchased.

We did not see satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions. There were no servicing records for the air conditioning system or the autoclave which was in use at the time of our inspection. However, in house testing of the autoclave was being carried out in line with manufacturer’s instructions.

The practice had some arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment, but not all the required radiation protection information was available. Recent servicing records for the intra-oral X-ray unit were not available for review at the time of the inspection. Staff told us that servicing had been completed in the previous month and they had not yet received the report. The most recent servicing record available for review was dated June 2022. Consequently, there was no evidence available to demonstrate that annual electro-mechanical servicing had been undertaken between June 2022 and May 2026. In addition, the practice had not notified the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) that they worked with radiation generators. There were 2 other X-ray machines within the practice which were not in use at the time of our inspection. Following advice from the inspection team, the practice ensured that the X-ray machines which were not in use were clearly labelled as being decommissioned and provided evidence to demonstrate that they had registered with the HSE. We do not assess compliance with the Ionising Radiation regulations 2017 and the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) regulations 2017 but we do request services to provide evidence thatdemonstratestheir compliance to inform our findings.

Fire exits were clear and well signposted. However, the last fire risk assessment had been completed in 2022, and the practice had not acted on all recommendations within this fire risk assessment. The practice had installed smoke alarms in May 2026 but had not considered the need for emergency lighting within the stairwell, which had minimal natural lighting. The fire extinguishers were stored in a manner which could make them difficult to access, as they were stored at height. The practice arranged for another fire risk assessment to be completed.

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. Improvements could be made to the log to ensure it effectively tracked all prescriptions used.

Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff, including agency or locum staff. Improvements were required to ensure that evidence of immunity to Hepatitis B is obtained for all clinical staff at the point of recruitment.

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

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. They 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.

The practice manager ensured that their own and the trainee dental nurses’ training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. Following feedback from the inspection team, the trainee dental nurse completed level 2 safeguarding training. Further improvements were required as the principal dentist had not completed training in fire safety or learning disabilities and autism.

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, 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.

Staff used personal protective equipment and decontaminated dental instruments after use, in line with national guidance. The practice had purchased a new vacuum autoclave and ultrasonic bath just prior to our inspection. The new autoclave was installed and validated in the week after our inspection. We were told that the new autoclave would be serviced regularly in line with manufacturer’s instructions. 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 Legionella risk assessment had been completed on 29 May 2026. The practice was in the process of implementing all actions from the risk assessment, including arranging for dead-legs to be removed. A dead-leg is a section of pipework where water can become stagnant.

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

The practice had completed an infection prevention and control audit a few days prior to our inspection. This audit had identified the same areas of wear and tear around the practice observed during our inspection and had documented the areas of improvement required. Infection prevention and control audits should be completed every 6 months.

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