You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

We have not inspected this service yet

Inspection summaries and ratings from previous provider


Overall summary & rating

Updated 28 May 2019

We carried out this announced inspection on 15 April 2019 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. We planned the inspection to check whether the registered provider was meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations. The inspection was led by a CQC inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we always ask the following five questions:

• Is it safe?

• Is it effective?

• Is it caring?

• Is it responsive to people’s needs?

• Is it well-led?

These questions form the framework for the areas we look at during the inspection.

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

Hanover Dental Practice is in Newcastle Under Lyme and provides mainly NHS with some private treatment to adults and children.

A portable ramp is available to provide access to the rear of the practice for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. Car parking spaces, including those for blue badge holders, are available in a long stay car park near the practice.

The dental team includes four dentists, six dental nurses (including four trainees), one dental hygienist, three receptionists, a practice manager and a general manager. The practice and general manager are also trained dental nurses. The practice has four treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by a partnership and as a condition of registration must have a person registered with the Care Quality Commission as the registered manager. Registered managers have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the practice is run. The registered manager at Hanover Dental Practice is the senior partner.

On the day of inspection, we received feedback from 24 patients.

During the inspection we spoke with two dentists, two dental nurses, one receptionist, a trainee dental nurse who was working on reception, the practice manager and the general manager. We looked at practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open: Monday to Friday 8.30am to 4.30pm. The practice is closed for one-hour lunch each day).

Our key findings were:

  • The practice appeared clean and well maintained.
  • The provider had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance. The practice was using a standardised infection control policy. Following this inspection, we were sent a copy of the policy which was amended to reflect the needs of the practice.
  • Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available.
  • The practice had systems to help them manage risk to patients and staff.
  • The provider had suitable safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.
  • The provider had thorough staff recruitment procedures. Not all recruitment information for dentists employed was available on the premises.
  • The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
  • Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information.
  • Staff were providing preventive care and supporting patients to ensure better oral health.
  • The appointment system took account of patients’ needs.
  • The provider had effective leadership and a culture of continuous improvement.
  • Staff felt involved and supported and worked well as a team.
  • The provider asked patients for feedback about the services they provided.
  • Systems for recording and monitoring complaints could be improved. There was no system in place for monitoring verbal complaints made.
  • The provider had suitable information governance arrangements.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements. They should:

  • Review the practice’s system for recording, investigating and reviewing incidents or significant events with a view to preventing further occurrences and ensuring that improvements are made as a result.

  • Introduce protocols regarding the prescribing of antibiotic medicines taking into account the guidance provided by the Faculty of General Dental Practice.
  • Review the practice's complaint handling procedures and establish an accessible system for identifying, receiving, recording, handling and responding to complaints by service users.

Inspection areas

Safe

No action required

Updated 28 May 2019

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

The practice had systems and processes to provide safe care and treatment. Systems for learning from incidents could be improved. The practice was not recording all significant events; this would demonstrate that they were discussed with staff and action taken to address any issues.

Staff received training in safeguarding people and knew how to recognise the signs of abuse and how to report concerns.

Staff were qualified for their roles and the practice completed essential recruitment checks. Not all recruitment information for dentists was available at the practice.

Premises and equipment were clean and properly maintained. The practice followed national guidance for cleaning, sterilising and storing dental instruments.

The practice had suitable arrangements for dealing with medical and other emergencies.

Effective

No action required

Updated 28 May 2019

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

The dentists assessed patients’ needs and provided care and treatment in line with recognised guidance. Patients described the treatment they received as professional and excellent. The dentists discussed treatment with patients so they could give informed consent and recorded this in their records.

The practice had clear arrangements when patients needed to be referred to other dental or health care professionals.

The provider supported staff to complete training relevant to their roles and had systems to help them monitor this.

Caring

No action required

Updated 28 May 2019

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

We received feedback about the practice from 24 people. Patients were positive about all aspects of the service the practice provided. They told us staff were friendly, kind and caring.

They said that they were given detailed, helpful explanations about dental treatment, and said their dentist listened to them. Patients commented that they made them feel at ease, especially when they were anxious about visiting the dentist.

We saw that staff protected patients’ privacy and were aware of the importance of confidentiality. Patients said staff treated them with dignity and respect.

Responsive

No action required

Updated 28 May 2019

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

The practice’s appointment system took account of patients’ needs. Patients could get an appointment quickly if in pain. Patients told us that the practice saw them quickly when they had dental pain.

Staff considered patients’ different needs. This included providing facilities for patients with a disability and families with children. A portable ramp was available to enable those who used wheelchairs to access the practice. One of the treatment rooms was located on the ground floor. The patient toilet was on the first floor of the building, accessible by steps. The practice information leaflet alerted patients that the practice was unable to offer full access to disabled persons. The practice had access to telephone interpreter services but had not used these recently. Staff were aware of patients’ individual communication needs and felt that these were met. The practice did not have a hearing loop but currently staff felt that this was not required.

The practice took patients views seriously. They valued compliments from patients. Information regarding verbal complaints was logged on patient notes but there was no evidence that the practice was monitoring these.

Well-led

No action required

Updated 28 May 2019

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

The practice had arrangements to ensure the smooth running of the service. These included systems for the practice team to discuss the quality and safety of the care and treatment provided. There was a clearly defined management structure and staff felt supported. Staff told us that the practice manager was approachable and helpful.

The practice team kept complete patient dental care records which were, clearly written or typed and stored securely.

The provider monitored clinical and non-clinical areas of their work to help them improve and learn. This included asking for and listening to the views of patients and staff.