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 protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights (outcome 7)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights are respected and upheld.

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 who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse. The provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent it before it occurred.

Reasons for our judgement

All the patients we spoke with were positive about the conduct of the staff at the practice.

All the staff we spoke with were aware of the potential signs of abuse and what action they would take. They had completed training on child protection and the safeguarding of vulnerable adults and were aware of the role of the local authority. We saw that flow charts were on display which described the safeguarding process to be followed and details of local contacts. Staff had access to a safeguarding policy and procedure. We saw that guidance on child protection was displayed in the waiting room. The practice had a whistle blowing policy which meant that staff could raise concerns without fear of recrimination.

We were told that the practice did not have any patients who lacked the mental capacity to make a decision. We discussed the issue of consent by people with a learning disability or dementia with staff. They understood the role played by family members and legal representatives in decision making. We were told that consent was needed before care was discussed with a third party. The practice also had a chaperone policy.