The Care Quality Commission
  • Dentist
  • Dentist

Archived: Frampton Dental Practice

288 Park Lane, Frampton Cotterell, Bristol, BS36 2BL (01454) 774655

Provided and run by:
Vinay Shah

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile
Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

26 May 2017

During a routine inspection

We carried out this announced inspection on 26 May 2017 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.

We told the NHS England area team and Healthwatch that we were inspecting the practice. They did not provide any information which we took into account.

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

Frampton Dental Practice is in Frampton Cotterell and provides NHS and private treatment to patients of all ages.

Access for people who use wheelchairs and pushchairs is via a small step or portable ramp. There are a small number of car parking spaces at the front of the practice or local on street car parking near the practice.

The dental team includes three dentists and an orthodontist, six dental nurses and one trainee dental nurse, two dental hygienists, and three receptionists. The practice has three treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by an individual who is a dentist but who does not work on a day to day basis in the practice. 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. One of the principal dentists is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons 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 50 CQC comment cards filled in by patients and spoke with three other patients. This information gave us a positive view of the practice.

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

The practice is open: Monday 9am to 1pm and 2pm to 7pm, Tuesday to Friday 9am to 1pm and 2pm to 5.30pm. Saturday and Sunday: Closed

Our key findings were:

  • The practice was clean and well maintained.
  • The practice had suitable safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding adults and children, although some staff were due to have safeguarding training in the near future.
  • The practice had thorough staff recruitment procedures.
  • Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available.
  • The appointment system met patients’ needs.
  • The practice had effective leadership. Staff felt involved 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.
  • The practice had systems to help them manage risk.
  • The practice had protocols for record keeping but we found that medical history updates were not always recorded in the records.
  • The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines although we found that Rubber Dams are not always used during root canal treatment.
  • The practice did not always provide patients with a copy of their referral letters.
  • Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information but we found that clinical notes stored between the front door and the reception area, were not locked away during opening hours unless the receptionists left the area.
  • The practice had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance, although there was no separate room for decontamination and we found that it was not possible to complete the end to end process for decontamination in one of the surgeries. The washing / ultrasonic cleaning was completed in one treatment room. Dental instruments were then transported to another treatment room for packing and sterilisation.
  • The practice had not completed an Annual Statement in relation to infection prevention control as required under The Health and Social Care Act 2008: ‘Code of Practice about the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.

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

  • Review the storage of dental care records to ensure they are stored securely at all times.
  • Review the current arrangements for the end to end decontamination process.
  • Review the practice's protocols for completion of dental care records taking into account guidance provided by the Faculty of General Dental Practice regarding clinical examinations and record keeping.
  • Review the use of rubber dams in line with guidance from the British Endodontic Society when providing root canal treatment.
  • Review the need for an Annual Statement in relation to infection prevention control as required under The Health and Social Care Act 2008: ‘Code of Practice about the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.
  • Review the current staffing arrangements to ensure all dental care professionals are adequately supported by a trained member of the dental team when treating patients in a dental setting taking into account the guidance issued by the General Dental Council.

8 May 2014

During a routine inspection

The purpose of this inspection was to find out answers to five key questions. Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection when we sought information about people's experience and gained views from people who used the service, the staff who supported them and from looking at records.

We spoke with the providers, two dentists, two dental nurses and two receptionists. In addition we had the opportunity to ask four people who attended the practice during our visit, about their care and treatment.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service caring?

We spoke with four people who attended the practice during our inspection visit. One of them was newly registered with the practice whilst others had been attending for a number of years. They were all happy with the service they received. One person told us they used to go to another practice and had changed because they did not like that practice. They said they had 'not been disappointed' with the Frampton Dental Practice. They told us they had been recommended the practice by a friend and described the practice as a 'good, old fashioned, friendly practice'. Another person told us they had been recommended the practice and had since recommended it to a relative.

Is the service responsive?

People described the staff as 'Lovely, friendly and human', 'Friendly and helpful' and 'Very polite'. One person told us they found the staff always willing to help and accommodating in an emergency. They said the staff 'Put you at ease' and were 'friendly and welcoming'. Two of the people we spoke with told us they were given emergency appointments at short notice.

Is the service safe?

People were cared for in clean and hygienic premises. Routine maintenance of equipment was carried out to ensure it was safe for use.

Is the service effective?

We looked at the clinical records of four people and saw they had been referred to other service providers for treatment. This included referral to a specialist anaesthetic clinic, and we saw the person had signed to give consent to the referral being made. There were also referrals for specialist endodontic (root canal) and periodontic (gum) treatments. When referrals were made a copy of the referral letter and other correspondence was kept in people's records.

Is the service well led?

We spoke with the providers, two dentists and dental nurses along with the two receptionists. All of the staff were happy working at the practice. The dentists described the providers as 'approachable' and as 'doing a good job' of running the practice.

Practice meetings were held to discuss issues, review policies and update training. Staff had opportunities for maintaining Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and the provider carried out annual appraisal of staff performance.

11 September 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with three patients when we visited the practice. They told us that they were satisfied with the service they received and had been attending the practice for many years. They said they were involved in making decisions about treatment plans, were given explanations about options available, and were informed of costs. Each patient had been attending the practice for many years and expressed their satisfaction at the service they received. One patient said that their whole family used the same service. Another patient said that they had chosen to 'change dentists within the practice' because they preferred the approach of one as against the one they were registered with. The third patient said that the practice "moved heaven and earth to get you seen if you needed urgent treatment".

One patient said the practice was always clean and tidy and that they had no concerns about cleanliness. Another patient said that the dentist always washed their hands before starting any treatment. The third patient said that the dentist always asked them if they were well and they took this to mean 'did they have any infections?'

The three patients were complimentary about the service they received and the dental staff who provided it. They said they found the staff welcoming, friendly and polite. Patients that we spoke with told us that they were asked for their opinions on the practice and what they thought about their dental care.