Great Central Dental LTD Also known as Great Central Dental

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 line with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Although there were issues to be addressed, the impact of our concerns relates to the governance and the oversight of the risks, rather than a patient safety risk.

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. However, we found these were not always applied consistently or effectively, particularly in relation to risks associated with medical emergencies, fire safety, radiography, medicines and prescriptions, infection prevention and control and Legionella.

Systems for checking emergency equipment and medicines required strengthening as they had not identified that items of medical emergency kit were missing or out of date. Items that were missing or were found to be out of date were ordered immediately following our inspection. We were also assured the weekly checklists and equipment logs would be reviewed and updated to ensure all items were present and expiry dates had not been exceeded.

Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely.

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

The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment. However, there was no evidence the 3-yearly performance check had been completed on X-ray equipment. We also noted that local rules displayed in the surgery required updating. We do not assess compliance with the Ionising Radiation regulations 2017 and the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) regulations 2017 but we do request services to provide evidence that demonstrates their compliance to inform our findings. We were provided assurance following our inspection a 3-yearly performance check had been scheduled.

Systems and processes were in place to manage fire safety and fire exits were clear and well signposted. However, we noted outstanding recommendations for action from the fire risk assessment completed in 2021. We also noted fire evacuation drills were not completed at regular intervals.

The practice had systems in place for the management of medicines; however, we identified opportunities to improve the management of prescribing and dispensing medicines, including access and tracking arrangements.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable 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.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were enough staff on duty at all times. 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.

The practice ensured staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals.

There were effective 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 annual appraisals, one-to-one meetings, clinical supervision and ongoing informal discussions.

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

The practice had infection prevention and control procedures which required strengthening to reflect published guidance. There was scope to improve staff knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes.

Staff used personal protective equipment and decontaminated dental instruments after use, in line with national guidance. We saw, and staff confirmed that single-use items were not reprocessed.

The practice had procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems. At the time of our inspection, we found recommendations from an external risk assessment completed in 2023 had not been addressed. Water temperatures were monitored; however, action had not been taken if water temperatures were below the required level.

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

Equipment was maintained and serviced in line with manufacturers’ instructions.

The practice completed infection prevention and control audits; however, the findings were not reflective of practice and there was scope to ensure these were completed bi-annually in line with current guidance.

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