National Dental Also known as National Dental and Implant Centre Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We found this practice was not providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations. We will be following up on our concerns to ensure the provider has made the required improvements.

During our inspection of this key question, we found concerns related to the completeness of patient care records, the practice not having an effective system to monitor patients’ referrals to other dental or health care professionals, and the practice having an ineffective system to keep dental professionals up to date with current evidence-based practice.

These concerns were in breach of Regulations 12 and 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

You can find more details of our concerns in the detailed findings below.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Assessing needs is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The provider had ineffective systems to ensure that people who used the service received person-centred care and treatment, that was appropriate, met their needs and was reflective of their personal preferences.

Not all of the staff had the skills, knowledge or experience to carry out their roles, and had not kept up-to-date with current evidence-based practice.

We looked at 8 patient care records. The information recorded in these patient care records was not in line with recognised guidance and in some cases no notes of the treatment provided had been recorded. Often, the only indication that treatment had been provided during an appointment was the evidence of radiographs taken and a service charge added.

Staff told us they obtained patients’ consent for treatment in line with legislation and guidance, but this was not recorded and staff did not fully understand their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff described how they involved patients’ relatives or carers when appropriate and made sure they had enough time to explain treatment options clearly, but we did not see evidence of this in the records reviewed.

We did not see evidence the dentists justified, graded or reported on the radiographs they took.

The practice had systems for prescribing and dispensing of medicines which were not wholly in line with current guidance. For example, anti-microbial medicines were prescribed for 7 days, not the recommended 5 days, and the labels on antibiotics being dispensed did not include the practice details. In addition, although antimicrobial prescribing audits were carried out, they were not reflective of practice, had no standard set and contained no analysis or evaluation for learning.

The practice offered dental implants. Staff told us they obtained full consent, however we did not see detailed records of treatment. Staff had access to the appropriate equipment for the placement of implants.

Patients were referred to primary and secondary care specialists for treatment the practice did not provide. This included referring patients with suspected cancer under the national faster diagnosis pathways. However, referrals were not effectively tracked or followed up.

The judgement for How staff, teams and services work together is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Supporting people to live healthier lives is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Monitoring and improving outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Consent to care and treatment is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.