Archived: Your Dentist London

People who used the service were encouraged to give feedback on the web-site for the practice. We saw that people had made comments that included 'Never had any problems with the service.' and 'staff are professional'.

There was an up to date safeguarding policy in place and it contained a clear procedure for staff to follow and details of agencies to contact if abuse was suspected.

We saw that there were adequate staff recruitment processes in place which included interviewing, checking qualifications and immunisations. References and criminal records checks had been carried out for all staff.

There was evidence that staff were supported in their work. Practice meetings were held monthly and we were told and saw evidence that all staff received an annual appraisal. There were records of staff training through internal workshops and external courses.

We did not speak with any people using the service on this inspection.

The practice did not have a safeguarding policy and procedure. Staff we spoke with were unable to describe the types of abuse they may come across and did not know who to contact if they suspected abuse.

We found the waiting area and treatment rooms in a clean and hygienic condition. The practice had effective decontamination procedures in place. Equipment used for treatment was sealed in plastic packs after they were sterilised. The machines used to clean, decontaminate and sterilise tools were working and appropriately maintained.

There were shortcomings in the procedures used to recruit new members of staff. References had not been sought for three members of staff, criminal records checks with the disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) had only been carried out for one member of staff.

Staff told us they did not have regular one to one meetings to discuss their performance but felt they could approach the registered manager any time if they had concerns. Staff member were not receiving annual appraisals.

The provider was not taking account of people's comments and complaints to improve the service.

People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment by staff who had been appropriately recruited. The provider had followed national guidance in relation the decontamination of reusable instruments to protect people from the risk of infection. There were arrangements in place to deal with medical emergencies, including emergency equipment which staff had been trained to use.

Care and treatment was carried out in way that ensured a person's safety and welfare. People were required to complete a medical history and this was reviewed by their dentist who would be examining and treating them. Where necessary, people were referred to an alternative practice or specialist.