Sileby Family Dental Centre

Updated 27 March 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 1 February 2017. The inspection was led by a CQC inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

We reviewed information we held about the practice prior to our inspection.

During the inspection we spoke with the regional clinical quality and care manager, an area manager (from a different area), two dentists, two trainee dental nurses, and the receptionist.

To assess the quality of care provided we looked at practice policies and protocols and other records relating to the management of the 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?

These questions therefore formed the framework for the areas we looked at during the inspection.

Updated 27 March 2017

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 1 February 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

Sileby Family Dental Centre is a dental practice providing predominantly NHS and some private care for adults and children. Where private treatment is provided it is under a fee per item basis. The practice is situated in a converted commercial property with patient facilities on two floors.

The practice has three dental treatment rooms. There is also a reception and waiting area and other rooms used by the practice for office facilities and storage. The practice is open from 9.00am to 6.00pm from Monday to Friday and closes for lunch from 1.00pm to 2.00pm.

The practice has one full time and one part time dentist who are able to provide general dental services including endodontic (root canal) treatment and some cosmetic dentistry. They are supported by a dental nurse, a trainee dental nurse and a receptionist. There is also a practice manager who shares their time between the practice and two other practices they manage.

One of the business partners (who are not based at the practice) 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.

Before the inspection we sent Care Quality Commission comment cards to the practice for patients to complete to tell us about their experience. We also spoke with patients on the day of our inspection. We received feedback from a total of 21 patients. All feedback was positive with patients commenting favourably on the quality of care and service they received, the professional and helpful nature of staff and the cleanliness of the practice.

Our key findings were:

• Staff reported incidents which were investigated, discussed and learning implemented to improve safety.
• The practice was visibly clean and well maintained and we found that infection control procedures were in line with the requirements of the ‘Health Technical Memorandum 01-05 (HTM 01-05): Decontamination in primary care dental practices’ published by the Department of Health.

• The practice had medicines and equipment for use in a medical emergency which were in accordance with national guidelines with the exception that the expiry date of the glucagon had not been adjusted correctly to allow for it not being refrigerated. This was corrected during our inspection. Also the medical oxygen cylinder in use at the practice was larger than recommended and not easily portable in an emergency. This was replaced by two smaller oxygen cylinders following our inspection.
• Staff had received training appropriate to their roles and were supported in their continued professional development (CPD).
• Patients commented that they were pleased with the care they received and that staff were helpful, kind and courteous.

• The practice had suitable facilities and was equipped to treat patients and meet their needs. The practice was not accessible for wheelchair users.

• Governance arrangements were in place for the smooth running of the service but we found that not all required safety checks had been carried out and equipment was overdue servicing or checking. However this was implemented following our inspection.

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

• Review the system for monitoring and mitigating the risks associated with carrying out the regulated activities, specifically, those related to fire safety.