Hungarian DentaCare Ltd

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 15 November 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

Hungarian DentaCare Ltd located in Battersea London, provides private dental treatment to mainly adult patients

Practice staffing consists of the four dentists, two implantologists, three dental nurses, one trainee dental nurse, one receptionist, two patient co-ordinators and a practice manager/Director.

One of the administration staff 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.

The practice is open Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday 9an to 6pm, Wednesday 8am to 8pm and Saturdays 9am to 4pm.

The practice facilities include two treatment rooms, a reception and waiting area, decontamination room, 2 patient consultation rooms, large office and staff room/kitchen. The

49 patients provided feedback about the service. Patients we spoke with and those who completed comment cards were very positive about the care they received about the service. Patients told us that they were happy with the treatment and advice they had received.

Our key findings were:

• Equipment, such as the autoclaves, fire extinguishers, and X-ray equipment had all been checked for effectiveness and had been regularly serviced.
• Patients were treated with dignity and respect and confidentiality was maintained.
• Patients received clear explanations about their proposed treatment, costs, benefits and risks and were involved in making decisions about it.
• Staff had received safeguarding children and adults training and knew the processes to follow to raise any concerns. The practice had whistleblowing policies and procedure and staff were aware of these and their responsibilities to report any concerns.
• The practice had a procedure for handling and responding to complaints, which were displayed and available to patients.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned in line with current guidance such as from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).
• There were systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. Dental instruments were cleaned and sterilised in line with current guidance.

• Governance systems were effective and there were a range of policies and procedures in place which underpinned the management of the practice. Clinical audits were carried out to monitor the quality of services.

• The practice sought feedback from patients about the services they provided and acted on this to improve its services.
• Staff had been trained to handle medical emergencies, and appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were readily available. However when we checked the oxygen cylinder it was empty as it had been left in the open position when it was last checked.

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

• Review availability of equipment to manage medical emergencies taking into account guidelines issued by the Resuscitation Council (UK), and the General Dental Council (GDC) standards for the dental team.