Glumangate Dental Practice

Updated 14 January 2016

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 practice 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 December 2015. The inspection team consisted of a Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspector and a dental specialist advisor. Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the provider together with information that we asked them to send to us in advance of the inspection. During our inspection visit, we reviewed a range of policies and procedures and other documents including dental care records. We spoke with seven members of staff, including members of the management team.

Before the inspection we asked the practice to send us information which we reviewed. This included the complaints they 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 also reviewed the information we held about the practice and found there were no areas of concern.

During the inspection we spoke with two dentists and three dental nurses. We reviewed policies, procedures and other documents. We received feedback from 37 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?

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

Updated 14 January 2016

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 1 December 2015 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

Glumangate dental practice is situated over three floors of premises close to Chesterfield town centre. The ground and first floor are accessible to patients. The practice was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) in October 2011. The practice provides regulated dental services to patients in the Chesterfield area of north Derbyshire. The practice provides both NHS and private dental treatment, with approximately 70% being NHS patients. Services provided include general dentistry, dental hygiene, teeth whitening, crowns and bridges, and root canal treatment.

The practice is open Mondays: 9:00 am to 5:45 pm; Tuesdays: 9:00 am to 5:00 pm; Wednesdays: 9:00 am to 5:00 pm; Thursdays: 9:00 am to 5:15 pm and Fridays: 9:00 am to 5:00 pm. The practice is closed at the weekend. Access for urgent treatment outside of opening hours is by ringing the practice and following the instructions on the recorded message.

The practice has seven dentists, although not all work full time, one dental hygienist and six dental nurses who also work on reception. There is one trainee dental nurse at the practice.

We received very positive feedback from 37 patients about the services provided. Patients expressed satisfaction with the whole service from reception to the dentist’s chair. Three patients said they had been seen quickly in an emergency, and one had a quick referral to the hospital for suspected cancer. Nearly half of the patients who provided feedback referred to being put at ease and helped to overcome their fear and anxiety. We received specific feedback requesting grab rails at the front door to help with negotiating the step into the practice.

Our key findings were:

• The practice had systems and processes to record accidents, significant events and complaints.
• Learning from any complaints and significant incidents was recorded and learning was shared with staff.
• When necessary apologies were given to patients when things had gone wrong.
• All staff had received whistle blowing training and were aware of these procedures and how to use them.
• Patients spoke very positively about the dental service they received, and several recounted positive experiences they had had at the practice.
• Patients said they were treated with dignity and respect, from the reception desk through to seeing the dentist.
• Records showed there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of patients.
• Staff had been trained to deal with medical emergencies.
• Emergency medicines, an automated external defibrillator (AED), and oxygen were readily available. An AED is a portable electronic device that automatically diagnoses life threatening irregularities of the heart and delivers an electrical shock to attempt to restore a normal heart rhythm.
• The practice followed the relevant guidance from the Department of Health's: ‘Health Technical Memorandum 01-05 (HTM 01-05) for infection control.
• Patients’ care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines.
• Patients said they were involved in making decisions about their treatment, and records in the practice supported this view.
• Options for treatment were identified and explored and discussed with patients.
• Patients’ confidentiality was maintained.

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

• Review and update the Legionella risk assessment at the practice.
• As part of the Legionella risk assessment, hot water taps should be run on a regular basis and water temperatures recorded.
• Change the waste bin in decontamination room to a hands free, foot pedal design to reduce the infection control risks.
• Re-organise the storage of mops in the cleaning cupboard, so they do not pose a risk of cross infection.