You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 15 August 2013
Date of Publication: 13 September 2013
Inspection Report published 13 September 2013 PDF | 76.41 KB

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 15 August 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

We made observations on the day of our inspection of people being treated in a helpful and professional manner when arriving at the practice.

People expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. People we spoke with told us that treatments were well explained and that dental treatments were mainly covered by their dental insurance scheme. Information was made available in the reception area, regarding the fee structure for people who paid for treatment as and when received. Comments included “I think they’re professional, pleasant and do what’s necessary’ and ‘they’re very thorough and I feel confident with the service provided. I feel that I’m in capable hands’.

We reviewed the dental records and treatment plans of five people treated by the practice. These showed that people's treatment options had been discussed with them and showed where consent had been obtained. This meant that people were kept fully informed about the treatment available to them and were able to make informed decisions about their care and treatment.

We were told that the practice is situated in a listed building and the physical layout of the practice could not be altered to cater for people with mobility needs. People with mobility needs were advised of the services of a neighbouring dental practice which is based on one level.

The practice had a hearing loop system in place which assisted patients who are hard of hearing to understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.

We were told that the practice does not currently treat any patients that lack the mental capacity to make their own decisions. We found that staff had received mental capacity training. We were told that their code of practice would endeavour to explain treatment to the patient in a way which they could understand. If the person lacked the mental capacity to make their own decisions they would involve the person’s advocate. This meant that there was a procedure in place where a person’s advocate could express their views and were involved in making decisions about their relative’s treatment.