You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 9 July 2013
Date of Publication: 7 August 2013
Inspection Report published 07 August 2013 PDF | 79.28 KB

The service should have quality checking systems to manage risks and assure the health, welfare and safety of people who receive care (outcome 16)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Benefit from safe quality care, treatment and support, due to effective decision making and the management of risks to their health, welfare and safety.

How this check was done

We carried out a visit on 9 July 2013, observed how people were being cared for, talked with people who use the service and talked with staff.

We looked at treatment records.

Our judgement

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that patient receive. The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of patients using the service.

Reasons for our judgement

Patients who used the service, their representatives and staff were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. We saw a suggestions and comment box was available in the waiting room. We were shown a report and questionnaires completed by patients. All contained positive comments and we were told there had been no need to change anything as a result of the questionnaires. We viewed the accident and incident log which showed there had been no adverse incidents. We were told had any occurred these would have been reviewed to determine if action could be taken to prevent a reoccurrence.

We saw audits were completed to monitor the quality of the service provided.

Specific audits had also been completed such as infection control using the Infection Prevention Society guidance. We were told the audit was repeated every six months as per guidance. We saw a report had been completed following the audit which identified a few areas for improvement. We saw these had been completed. There were systems in place to ensure equipment was regularly serviced and well maintained. We saw decontamination equipment was checked daily with records maintained. This showed necessary action had been taken where daily tests had shown equipment had not been working correctly.

A records audit had been completed in November 2012 following British dental association guidance. In March 2013 radiograph and appointment book audits had been completed. These had shown no concerns or action required. There were therefore systems in place to monitor the service provided and action was taken, when required, to ensure people received a safe effective service.

The provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service. The practice had a complaints policy and procedure. We spoke with five patients none of whom had any concerns. They stated they would talk to the dentist or the receptionist if they had any concerns. Discussions with staff showed they would aim to resolve any issues before they became formal complaints. We were given an example of how a person was given some free dental products as they had had to wait whilst a previous patient’s treatment took longer than anticipated. We were told no complaints had been received. We viewed the complaints book which recorded no complaints. A system was therefore in place to record and manager complaints.