Archived: Cam Dental Practice

The practice did not have any patients who attended the practice for appointments at the time of out inspection but we read positive feedback from them in the last quality monitoring survey in 2013.

At our last inspection in April 2014 we found the arrangements for supervision and appraisal needed development to include yearly staff appraisals. At this inspection we saw the staff had worked hard to make improvements in this area. Staff members received yearly appraisals and there was a system in place for staff supervision and support.

The dental nurse told us 'we are looking at the way other practices in the areas used supervision and appraisals so we can improve. We know we haven't got it quite right yet but we are working on it.'

We met the provider, associate dentist, dental nurses and receptionist. In discussion with them we found them to be person centred and committed to providing a good service.

Since our last inspection there were improvements in relation to the arrangements for radiation protection and in the recording of checks of emergency medicines. Some staff had completed training in safeguarding vulnerable adults. There was an effective complaints system in place.

At our last inspection in October 2013 we found that there were no arrangements for the supervision or appraisal of staff and no audits to check the quality of service provided. During this visit we found that supervision or appraisal of staff had still not commenced. In respect of the quality monitoring of the service, there had been some developments however further improvements were needed.

We saw a range of information available for people including the procedure for making complaints. We were told the practice had not received any complaints.

There was a practice commitment to meeting the needs of people with a disability and we saw how this worked in practice when a person who used a wheelchair attended for treatment.

The treatment people received was recorded as was their medical history. Where x-rays were taken they listed the person's name and date of x-ray.

The provider was registered with the Care Quality Commission in April 2013 and was working towards ensuring suitable arrangements were in place. They acknowledged that there were areas for improvement. The provider had not taken steps to ensure that all arrangements were in place in relation to radiation protection.

Whilst staff had training opportunities to enable them to meet CPD (Continuing Professional Development) requirements that included child protection training they were not trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

There were no formal arrangements for the supervision and appraisal of staff or for the monitoring of the quality of service provided.