Bupa Dental Care Churchtown

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

We found this practice was providing responsive care in accordance 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 Person-centred Care is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Care provision, Integration and continuity is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Providing Information is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Listening to and involving people is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

Staff had carried out a disability access audit and had an action plan to continually improve access for patients.

Staff described the reasonable adjustments they had made to ensure the practice was accessible. For example, a portable hearing induction loop was available for those with hearing difficulties. Large print or alternative format letters and information sheets were available for people who needed them. Language translation services could be accessed if required. Wheelchair accessible ground floor surgeries and accessible toilet facilities were available.

Staff were clear about the importance of providing emotional support to patients when delivering care. For patients that were particularly nervous, these could be referred to a practice that offered treatment under sedation.

The practice supported more vulnerable members of society, for example, patients living with dementia or adults and children with a learning disability.

The practice displayed its opening hours and provided information on their website, including numbers to call in emergencies when the practice was not open.

The frequency of appointments was agreed between the dentist and the patient, giving due regard to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines. Where patients were using direct access to the hygienist, we discussed with reception staff how some patients attending hygienist appointments may think they are undergoing a full dental examination. We discussed how communication with patients could be improved in relation to this.

At the time of our inspection, patients who needed an urgent appointment were offered one in a timely manner. When the practice was unable to offer an urgent appointment, they worked with partner organisations to support urgent access for patients.

The judgement for Equity in experiences and outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.

The judgement for Planning for the future is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Responsive key question.