Northern Smiles

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.

Overall, 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 that were checked in line with national guidance. They knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

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

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Improvements should be made to the storage arrangements of hazardous substances, to ensure they were clearly labelled and stored safely. The safety information could also be reviewed to ensure it was easily accessible in the event of an accident.

The practice had fire detection equipment in place that was serviced and maintained, clear and well-signposted fire exits, and regular fire drills were undertaken. A fire risk assessment had been carried out in line with legal requirements; however, it should be reviewed to seek assurance regarding some possible discrepancies noted during the visit.

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 a clear understanding of safeguarding and knew how to access relevant information. Staff were also aware of their responsibilities in protecting vulnerable adults and children.

Records were available to demonstrate that staff completed regular training, including continuing professional development (CPD), and a system was in place to monitor training for employed staff. We discussed with the leadership team the benefits of including all clinical staff in this monitoring process to assure themselves that training is 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 annual appraisals, one-to-one check-ins, during clinical discussions, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions.

Some of the team members were longstanding members of staff, having been at the practice in excess of 20 years. It was evident from the feedback we received that all staff felt respected, supported and valued, and they enjoyed working in the practice.

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance.

Staff had received appropriate training and, overall, demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes. We discussed that refresher training may be beneficial to help reinforce some of the protocols.

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 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.

The practice had effective procedures in place to reduce the risk of Legionella or other bacteria developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment and current guidance. Dental unit water lines were appropriately managed, and temperature monitoring was in place. However, the risk assessment should be reviewed to ensure that all identified actions were addressed and to seek assurance regarding possible discrepancies.

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