Archived: Angel Dental

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 9 November 2016 to ask the practice the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this practice was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this practice was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this practice was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Angel Dental Practice is owned and run by one dentist who works full time, a trainee dental nurse, a practice manager, administration manager and a receptionist. The practice’s opening hours are 9am to 5pm on Monday to Friday with late night extended opening hours on a Tuesday until 8pm.

Angel Dental Practice provides private dental treatment for adults and children. The practice has one dental treatment room on the ground floor. There is a separate decontamination room for cleaning, sterilising and packing dental instruments. There is also a reception and waiting area.

Before the inspection we sent Care Quality Commission comments cards to the practice for patients to complete to tell us about their experience of the practice. During the inspection we spoke with two patients. Overall we received feedback from 15 patients who provided an overwhelmingly positive view of the services the practice provides. All of the patients commented that the quality of care was very good and staff were professional, friendly and caring.

Our key findings were

• Systems were in place for the recording and learning from significant events and accidents.
• The principal dentist had not registered to received medicines and health regulatory agency patient safety alerts, although they were aware of recent updates via another source.
• There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of patients.
• Patients were treated with dignity and respect.
• The practice was visibly clean and well maintained.
• Infection control procedures were in place with infection prevention and control audits being undertaken on a six monthly basis. Staff had access to personal protective equipment such as gloves and aprons.
• There was appropriate equipment for staff to undertake their duties, and equipment was well maintained.
• Oral health advice and treatment were provided in-line with the ‘Delivering Better Oral Health’ toolkit (DBOH).
• The provider had emergency medicines in line with the British National Formulary (BNF) guidance for medical emergencies in dental practice. Staff had been trained to deal with medical emergencies.
• The principal dentist was unsure of the processes to follow to obtain best interests decisions where a patient lacked the mental capacity to make a decision.
• The appointment system met the needs of patients and waiting times were kept to a minimum.
• The governance systems were effective.
• The practice was well-led and there were clearly defined leadership roles within the practice. Staff told us they felt supported, involved and they all worked as a team.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should

• Review the practice’s systems in place for receiving patient safety alerts from the medicines and health regulatory authority.
• Review staff awareness of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and ensure all staff are aware of their responsibilities.