Thornhill Dental Practice

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.

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 practice identified and managed risks effectively and staff described the processes. This included sharps safety, sepsis awareness and lone working.

Staff demonstrated an open culture in relation to people’s safety. They felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and this was reflected in our findings.

Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines. They knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year. The provider should implement an effective system of checks of medical emergency equipment and medicines taking into account the guidelines issued by the Resuscitation Council (UK). In particular, oversight of the checks carried out by the other practice provider should be strengthened, as these were being carried out monthly, instead of weekly as recommended. Following the inspection the provider gave us assurance that they would complete their own checks to ensure compliance.

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely.

We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions.

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available.

The practice managed fire safety well, and fire exits were clear and well signposted. Prior to inspection a new fire risk assessment was carried out by the practice owner, which recommended minor improvements.

The practice had systems for appropriate and safe management of medicines. NHS prescription pads were kept securely, and a log was put in place prior to inspection to monitor and track their use.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff, including agency or locum staff.

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 ensured staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals.

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 ongoing informal discussions.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice. “I feel very respected and supported.”

The practice had infection control procedures that broadly 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, broadly in line with national guidance. The provider should improve the practice’s infection control procedures and protocols taking into account the guidelines issued by the Department of Health in the Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices. In particular, the detergent used for manual instrument scrubbing was not specifically formulated for the purpose of cleaning instruments. Additionally there were no lidded boxes to transport contaminated instruments to the decontamination room, which did not align with nationally published guidance. Following our inspection we received assurances that these issues had been addressed. 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 practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste.

Equipment was maintained and serviced in line with manufacturers’ instructions.

The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance. Improvements were required to ensure the provider had greater oversight of the audits so they could be assured of their accuracy and used to identify and address any shortfalls.

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