Truro Road Dental Practice (St Austell)

We found patients' privacy, dignity and independence were respected and their views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered. Patients' needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. Fire evacuation procedures had been assessed and reviewed and fire safety equipment had been recently serviced.

We found the practice had effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. The practice was clean and hygienic and a process was in place to ensure appropriate cleaning standards were maintained. There were appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines and the risks associated with unsafe or unsuitable premises.

The provider had effective systems to assess and monitor the quality of service provided. There were systems in place to identify risks to the health and safety of people who use the service. Comments and complaints were used to improve the service and people who use the service were asked for their views on the care and treatment they received.

We found clinical patient records and records relating to the management of the service were accurate and fit for purpose. Systems were in place which ensured records were kept securely, could be located promptly when needed and were destroyed securely within appropriate timescales.

We asked five key questions:

Is the service safe?

All the patients said they were satisfied with the service. However, we found patients were at risk of receiving unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because the planning and delivery of care and treatment did not show it protected their welfare or met their needs. There were no arrangements for dealing with medical emergencies. Patients were at risk of cross infection because clinical guidance was not being followed.

The handling and management of medicines was not managed safely because effective systems were not followed at the practice which would ensure the safe storage, monitoring and disposal of medicines. Patients and others who accessed the premises were not protected from the risk of unsafe premises.

Is the service effective?

Patients were at risk because their care and treatment did not take into account published research and clinical guidance. Patients health and welfare were at risk because the dentist did not take action to train, supervise and appraise staff.

Is the service responsive?

Patients told us they were satisfied with the service they received and confirmed they were able to get appointments for times that suited them. One patient said they usually told the dentist of there were any changes to their regular medicines. Another patient said they did not know how to make a complaint.

Is the service caring?

Patient privacy and dignity was at risk of being compromised.

Is the service well led?

The provider did not have systems in place to ensure the quality of the service he provided was regularly assessed and monitored to ensure effective decision making and the management of risks to patients health, welfare and safety. Patient records were not accurate, fit for purpose, or held securely to ensure they remained confidential.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed.

We found that the practice was shabby and people who use the service, staff and visitors were not protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises as effective maintenance had not been completed.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.

We found people's views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care and people's privacy people experienced care, treatment and support which met their needs and protected their rights

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed.

We found there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs.