Dental Care London

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We found this practice was providing effective 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 Assessing needs is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The provider had systems to ensure that people who used the service received person-centred care and treatment, that was appropriate, met their needs and was reflective of their personal preferences. Preventive oral health care was encouraged.

Staff kept up-to-date with some evidence-based practice. Improvements could be made to ensure up to date knowledge of relevant legislation and guidance was accessible, including those published by the College of General Dentistry (CGDent) resources and as well as current prescribing guidance relating to dental practice. This included guidance on the appropriate use of prophylactic antimicrobial therapy for invasive dental procedures and the circumstances in which such treatment may be indicated.

We looked at 10 patient care records. The information recorded in these patient care records was not in line with recognised guidance. In particular, dental care records did not consistently record consent, Basic Periodontal Examinations (BPEs), risk assessments, extra-oral examinations, diagnoses, local anaesthetic administration, treatment options or documentation of discussions with patients. We did not see evidence the dentist consistently justified or reported on the radiographs they took. In some instances, there were no contemporaneous clinical notes recorded for a number of appointments. In mitigation, intra-oral scans were taken and images were maintained within the clinical records.

Staff obtained patients’ consent for treatment in line with legislation and guidance and understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff described how they involved patients’ relatives or carers when appropriate and made sure they had enough time to explain treatment options clearly.

The practice had systems for prescribing medicines. The provider should implement audits for prescribing of antibiotic medicines taking into account the guidance provided by the College of General Dentistry.

Patients were referred to primary and secondary care specialists for treatment the practice did not provide. This included referring patients with suspected cancer under the national faster diagnosis pathways.

Staff felt the practice supported them to develop and enabled them to take on responsibilities.

The judgement for How staff, teams and services work together is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Supporting people to live healthier lives is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Monitoring and improving outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Consent to care and treatment is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.