You are here

Maxted Meaden Dental Practice

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 25 February 2013
Date of Publication: 11 May 2013
Inspection Report published 11 May 2013 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 25 February 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

Patient’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected and people’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

Patient’s understood the care and treatment choices available to them and were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment.

In the waiting area, we observed that there were leaflets available for patients to take away, on various dental treatment options. Information on practice opening hours, staff, how to complain, treatment charges, confidentiality and the practice quality assurance statement were included in the practice leaflet we read and were also displayed as posters in the waiting room.

We spoke to two patients who advised us that there was always plenty of information supplied in documentary format and that they were always made aware of the charges that were applied for their treatment prior to starting treatment.

Patient’s expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. We saw that there was a comments and suggestion box in the waiting room. The practice manager advised us that most of the patient comments/suggestions were complimentary, but there was a general opinion that there was not enough variety of reading material in the waiting area. We were shown the minutes of a staff meting where the staff team had discussed this. The decision taken was to implement a patient audit of reading material so that a decision could be made on what reading material to provide. We saw the audit displayed in the waiting area for patients to complete.

Patient’s diversity, values and human rights were respected.

We asked the practice manager and reception staff how they would handle private phone calls or face to face conversations with patients. We were shown that all phones used were portable and calls or conversations could be taken or conducted in the private area at the rear of the ground floor, or if possible in a free surgery.