Archived: Parade Dental Practice

Updated 7 September 2016

The inspection was carried out on 20 June 2016 by a CQC inspector and a dental specialist advisor. We reviewed information received from the provider prior to the inspection. On the day of our inspection we looked at practice’s policies and protocols, clinical patient records and other records relating to the management of the service. We spoke with the provider (who was the registered manager and the principal dentist), two associate dentists, four dental nurses and a receptionist. We reviewed 50 Care Quality Commission (CQC) comment cards that had been completed by patients in the two weeks prior to our inspection.

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?

This informed our view of the care provided and the management of the practice.

Updated 7 September 2016

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 20 June 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

Parade Dental Practice is a general dental practice in Ewell, Surrey, offering NHS and private dental treatment to adults and children. The premises are located alongside residential houses and retail shops and consists of a first, second and third floor. There are five dental treatment rooms, a reception area, two waiting areas and a designated decontamination room.

The practice staffing consisted of a principal dentist (who was also the provider and manager of the practice), three general dentists, two visiting specialist dentists and five dental nurses (including two that work on reception). The dental team worked various part-time hours to accommodate flexible working depending on the need.

The principal dentist is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. 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.

We reviewed 50 Care Quality Commission (CQC) comment cards that had been completed by patients in the two weeks prior to our inspection. Common themes were patients felt they received excellent care from dentists who were kind, caring and gentle. They also commented that dental nurses appeared well trained and the reception staff were always smiling, helpful and welcoming.

Our key findings were:

• There was an induction programme for staff to follow which ensured they were skilled and competent in delivering safe and effective care and support to patients.
• The practice ensured staff maintained the necessary skills and competence to support the needs of patients.
• There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. We found the treatment rooms and equipment were visibly clean.
• There were systems in place to check equipment had been serviced regularly, including the dental air compressor, autoclaves, fire extinguishers and the X-ray equipment.

• We found the dentists regularly assessed each patient’s gum health and dentists took X-rays at appropriate intervals.

• The practice kept up to date with current guidelines when considering the care and treatment needs of patients.

• Staff had been trained to handle emergencies and appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were readily available.
• Patients received clear explanations about their proposed treatment, and its costs, benefits and risks and were involved in making decisions about it.
• Patients were treated with dignity and respect and confidentiality was maintained.
• The appointment system met the needs of patients and waiting times were kept to a minimum.
• There was an effective complaints system and the practice was open and transparent with patients if a mistake had been made.
• Staff demonstrated knowledge of the practice whistleblowing policy and were confident they would raise a concern about another staff member’s performance if it was necessary.

• At our visit we observed staff were kind, caring and very welcoming.

• There was an effective system in place to act on feedback received from patients and staff.