Waterside 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.

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.

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.

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

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were stored safely; however, improvement should be made to labelling of the storage of these items. The practice confirmed that labelling would be put in place immediately.

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available. This included cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), and portable X-ray equipment.

The practice identified and managed risks and staff described the processes. This included sharps safety and sepsis awareness.

Staff could access emergency equipment and medicines. Improvements should be made to ensure that equipment is checked in line with national guidance. We have received evidence from the practice that any expired products have been replaced. Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

Staff providing treatment to patients under sedation had also completed immediate life support training.

The practice should make improvements in fire safety. Fire exits were clear and well signposted. The practice was located within a shared premises where a number of fire safety responsibilities were managed by the landlord. While these activities were not directly under the practice's control, there was limited evidence demonstrating that the practice had obtained assurance the required testing and maintenance activities had been completed by the landlord. We have received confirmation from the practice that verification is now in place and servicing record copies have been obtained.

The practice had systems for appropriate and safe management of medicines. These systems were not always effective and improvement should be made to enable effective oversight of stock levels.

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.

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 daily huddles, annual appraisals, during clinical supervision, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions.

Staff felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice.

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 had a recruitment policy and procedures, however, these did not wholly reflect relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff. Improvement should be made to ensure that satisfactory evidence of conduct is collected for staff. We discussed this with the practice, and they assured us they will update their procedures to incorporate the relevant legislation going forward.

The practice did not always ensure staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. We discussed this with the practice during the inspection, and the practice assured us they would look into ways to achieve more effective oversight.

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. 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.

Improvement should be made to ensure processing of instruments is in line with national guidance and that cleaning equipment is stored in a way that allows them to dry fully between uses.The practice took steps to rectify this shortfall immediately and these items were reprocessed.

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