You are here

Archived: Pontesbury Dental Practice

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

This service is now registered at a different address - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 13 August 2013
Date of Publication: 10 September 2013
Inspection Report published 10 September 2013 PDF

People should be cared for in a clean environment and protected from the risk of infection (outcome 8)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Providers of services comply with the requirements of regulation 12, with regard to the Code of Practice for health and adult social care on the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.

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 13 August 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and talked with other regulators or the Department of Health.

Our judgement

People were protected from the risk of infection.

Reasons for our judgement

People we spoke with expressed no concerns in relation to the cleanliness of the practice and the standards of hygiene. They confirmed the dental staff always wore disposable gloves and masks and offered them eye protection when providing treatment. One family told us their dentist always wore a new pair of disposable gloves for treating each member of the family. The dental staff we spoke with confirmed that procedures were adhered to for minimising cross infection in between patients.

One person contacted us and shared concerns about a tray of dental instruments from the previous patient being left out and the treatment room not being prepared for them. They also said they were not confident that the dentist had changed their gloves worn for the previous patient. The provider may find it useful to note that this could reduce the effectiveness of their infection control procedures.

We found that there were systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of

infection. Policies and procedures were available to instruct staff about how to manage cleanliness and infection control. We saw staff had received formal training in relation to infection prevention and control. Training certificates were available on the staff records we reviewed. We saw infection control was also discussed during staff meetings.

The practice did not have a designated room for sterilisation and decontamination of instruments and equipment. Instruments were currently being cleaned within each surgery. The registered manager shared details of the plans in place to move to best practice. The designated lead member of staff for infection control talked us through the decontamination process. This included an explanation of the equipment used and the decontamination process they followed to ensure people were not placed at risk of cross infection. Dental nurses showed us the records they maintained to show that the required checks had been undertaken.

There were arrangements in place for the disposal of clinical waste and for the management of ‘sharps’. Discussions held with staff showed they were aware of the procedure to follow in the event of receiving a needle stick injury. They confirmed their work-related vaccinations were up to date and this was reflected in the staff records we sampled.

The local infection prevention and control specialist nurse told us they had carried out an infection control audit of the premise in November 2012. The practice achieved an overall score of 100%. They also advised us that they had provided three staff with training in infection prevention and control in May this year. They told us the designated lead nurse was very good at contacting them if they had any problems or needed advice. We saw infection control was regularly audited by the lead nurse.