Archived: 123 Hoe Street

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We found this practice was providing safe 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 Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The practice had processes to identify and manage risks and staff we spoke with were able to describe these to us. Staff demonstrated an open culture in relation to people’s safety. Staff felt confident that risks were managed at the practice, and this was reflected in our findings.

Emergency equipment and medicines were available and checked in accordance with national guidance. Staff could access these in a timely way. Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year. Staff were also encouraged to participate in medical emergency scenario training.

The premises were visibly clean. At the time of the inspection the provider was in the process of decluttering and redecorating. Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely; however, improvements were required to ensure all items were risk assessed. Relevant safety data sheets were accessible to all staff.

We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions.

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment, and the required radiation protection information was available.

The management of fire safety was found to be of an acceptable standard; however, there were recommendations to replace existing doors with FD30 fire doors. Fire exits were observed to be clear and well signposted.

The practice had systems for appropriate and safe management of medicines. NHS prescription pads were kept securely; however, a system was not in place to monitor and track their use.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff, including agency or locum staff.

The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover.

Newly appointed staff had an appropriate role specific structured induction; however, improvements are needed to ensure a more formalised approach, including maintaining proper documentation.

Staff we spoke with had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were always sufficient levels of staff on duty. They demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew how to escalate safeguarding concerns within the practice and externally.

Whilst we saw some evidence of training, we found that systems were not sufficiently embedded to ensure it remained up-to-date and reviewed at required intervals.

There were processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities. Staff discussed their learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development during 1-to-1 meetings, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions. A documented formalised appraisal system was not in place to review staff performance.

Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice.

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance.

Staff received appropriate training and demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes.

We observed use of personal protective equipment and the decontamination of used dental instruments, which aligned with national guidance. We saw, and staff confirmed that single-use items were not reprocessed.

The practice had effective procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment and current guidance.

The practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste.

The equipment in use was maintained and serviced as per manufacturers’ instructions.

The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance. However, this could be improved by ensuring that the audits also include the funnels used as spittoons.

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.