Archived: Ferndale House Dental Practice

Updated 4 May 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the registered provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

We carried out an announced, comprehensive inspection on 8 March 2017. The inspection team consisted of a Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspector and a dental specialist advisor.

Before the inspection we asked for information to be sent, this included the complaints the practice had received in the last 12 months; their latest statement of purpose; the details of the staff members, their qualifications and proof of registration with their professional bodies.

We reviewed the information we held about the practice and found there were no concerns.

We reviewed policies, procedures and other documents. We received feedback from 38 patients about the dental service.

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?

Updated 4 May 2017

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 8 March 2017 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

Ferndale House Dental Practice is located in premises situated on the northern side of Chesterfield town centre. There are four treatment rooms two of which is situated on the ground floor. The practice provides only private dental treatments. The practice has its own car park at the rear of the premises or there is pay and display car parking available for dental patients close to the dental practice.

The practice provides regulated dental services to both adults and children. Services provided include general dentistry, dental hygiene, crowns and bridges, root canal treatment and dentistry under sedation.

The practice’s opening hours are – Monday: 9 am to 7:30 pm and Tuesday to Friday: 9 am to 5:30pm.

The practice has three dentists; one orthodontist; One oral surgeon; one hygienist; seven qualified dental nurses including one receptionist; and one office manager.

Access for urgent treatment outside of opening hours is by telephoning the practice and following the instructions on the answerphone message.

The principal dentist is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as an individual registered person. Registered persons 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 practice has three dentists; four qualified dental nurses including the practice manager; and one receptionist.

Before the inspection we sent CQC comments cards to the practice for patients to complete to tell us about their experience of the practice and during the inspection we spoke with patients. We received responses from 38 patients through both comment cards and by speaking with patients during the inspection. Those patients provided positive feedback about the services the practice provides. Among the themes we identified from patient feedback were: staff were respectful, the practice was clean, treatment was explained, and it was easy to get an appointment that suited.

Our key findings were:

• The premises were visibly clean and there were systems and processes in place to maintain the cleanliness.
• The systems to record accidents, significant events and complaints, learning points from these were recorded and used to make improvements.
• Records showed there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of patients.
• There were effective systems at the practice related to the Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations 2002.
• The system for receiving Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) alerts needed to be reviewed.
• The practice had a consent policy including reference to the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
• Patients were able to access emergency treatment when they were in pain.
• Patients provided positive feedback about their experiences at the practice. Patients said they were treated with dignity and respect and were able to get an appointment that suited their needs.
• Dental care records demonstrated that the dentists involved patients in discussions about treatment options.
• The practice offered a sedation service for patients. Sedation at the service was carried out safely and was in line with the national guidance.
• Patients’ confidentiality was protected within the practice.
• The records showed that apologies had been given for any concerns or upset that patients had experienced at the practice.
• The practice followed the relevant guidance from the Department of Health's: ‘Health Technical Memorandum 01-05 (HTM 01-05) for infection control with regard to cleaning and sterilizing dental instruments. However, the frequency of infection control audits needed to be reviewed and soil tests for the ultrasonic cleaner introduced.
• There was a whistleblowing policy accessible to all staff, who were aware of procedures to follow if they had any concerns about a colleague’s practice.
• The practice had the necessary equipment for staff to deal with medical emergencies, and staff had been trained how to use that equipment. This included an automated external defibrillator, medical oxygen and emergency medicines.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

• Review the practice’s infection control procedures and protocols giving due regard to guidelines issued by the Department of Health - Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices and The Health and Social Care Act 2008: ‘Code of Practice about the prevention and control of infections and related guidance. This with particular regard to carrying out six monthly infection control audits and completing soil tests on the ultrasonic cleaners. 

• Review the practice’s arrangements for receiving and responding to patient safety alerts, recalls and rapid response reports issued from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and through the Central Alerting System (CAS), as well as from other relevant bodies such as, Public Health England (PHE).