You are here

Archived: Richard Thompson Dental Practice

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 25 April 2013
Date of Publication: 21 May 2013
Inspection Report published 21 May 2013 PDF | 84.87 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 25 April 2013, observed how people were being cared for and talked with people who use the service. We talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected.

Reasons for our judgement

Patients were treated with dignity. We saw staff interact with patients in a respectful and polite manner and introduce themselves by name. One member of staff told us “Patients like it when you use their first name.” We asked one patient about their experience at the practice and they said “I’m happy. I’ve got no complaints.” They added “Every time I come here they’re very polite.” A new patient told us that staff had been “very pleasant and welcoming”.

Suitable arrangements were in place to ensure patient privacy. A sign in the waiting room made patients aware of a private consultation room that could be used if they wished. We were told that people could also speak with a dentist in private in the surgery. The number and flow of patients helped to support privacy by limiting the number of patients in the waiting room at the same time.

Patients were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. We spoke with one patient who told us their treatment had been explained to them and said “The dentist gave me options.” We observed the dentist make one patient aware of treatment options regarding missing teeth. We saw that patients were asked to sign a consent form before treatment and were given a copy of the record.

Patients were given appropriate information and support regarding their care or treatment. We saw that when patients joined the practice they were given a welcome pack. This included information on the team, services, opening hours, emergency care, confidentiality, fees and payment plans. Patients were given details of planned care and costs in a paper treatment plan. We were told that patients were give text message reminders of their appointment.

We saw that a range of information was available in the waiting room. This included the practice’s mission statement, the complaints policy, fees and information on dental care. We were told that information could be made available in a range of formats. The practice also had access to a language interpreter service. We were told that the practice also offered advice on smoking cessation and alcohol consumption.

Opening hours information and who to contact in the event of a dental emergency was also on display. In the out of hours period an answer phone message directed patients to emergency dental care services.

One patient told us they were offered a choice of appointment times. We heard the receptionist offer appointments and say “What time would you like?” to a person making a telephone booking. Patients were able to book their next appointment immediately after treatment or use the reminder service offered.

Patients were invited to express their views on the quality of service. For example we saw that a comments book was available in the waiting room. No comments had been made to date. We were told that an annual quality assurance survey was planned. Signs also directed patients to speak to the practice manager if they had concerns. We were told that patients had expressed an interest in developing a patient involvement group and this was to be discussed at a team meeting.

We saw that patients were advised on dental hygiene so that they could play their part in managing their care.

People’s diversity, values and human rights were respected. However due to the structure of the building it was not possible to accommodate disability access. We noted that the reception area did not have different types of seating to meet people’s needs. When we raised this with the staff we were told that this issue had been discussed and there were plans to provide a range of seating.

The provider may find it useful to note that the reception area did not have books or toys for children. We were told that reward stickers and small toys were given to children after treatment. Newspapers of the day were available. The reception area was clean, tidy and contemporary in style. Dental products were on display and available for purc