The Care Quality Commission
  • Dentist
  • Dentist

Thanet House Dental Care

65 Thanet Road, Bexley, Kent, DA5 1AP (01322) 558548

Provided and run by:
Dr Parvin Faramarzi

All Inspections

3 November 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We undertook a follow up desk-based review of Thanet House Dental Care on 3 November 2021. This inspection was carried out to review in detail the actions taken by the registered provider to improve the quality of care and to confirm that the practice was now meeting legal requirements.

The review was led by a CQC inspector who had remote access to a specialist dental adviser.

We undertook a comprehensive inspection of Thanet House Dental Care on 17 June 2021 under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. We found the registered provider was not providing well led care and was in breach of regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can read our report of that inspection by selecting the 'all reports' link for Thanet House Dental Care on our website www.cqc.org.uk.

As part of this inspection we asked:

• Is it well-led?

When one or more of the five questions are not met we require the service to make improvements and send us an action plan. We then inspect again after a reasonable interval, focusing on the area where improvement was required.

Our findings were:

Are services well-led?

We found this practice was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

The provider had made improvements in relation to the regulatory breach we found at our inspection on 17 June 2021.

Background

Thanet House Dental Care is in Bexley and provides NHS and private treatment for adults and children.

There is level access to the practice via a ramp, for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. Car parking spaces, including dedicated parking for blue badge holders, are available near the practice.

The dental team includes the principal dentist, four associate dentists, two dental nurses, two trainee dental nurses, one dental hygiene therapist, one reception manager, one administration manager and two receptionists. The practice has three treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by an individual who is the principal dentist there. They 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 and Friday - 9.00am to 6.00pm

Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

Our key findings were:

  • The practice had updated their sharps risk assessment and they had assessed relevant sharps within the dental practice
  • The practice had appropriate governance arrangements in place. Roles and responsibilities were clearly defined and job descriptions had been updated that were relevant for the roles people were carrying out.
  • A lone working risk assessment had been developed and put in place for when staff were lone working.
  • The practice was able to demonstrate that they had implemented the recommendations for the fire risk assessment.
  • Staff recruitment files were complete and up to date. Systems were in place for relevant documents confirming pre employment checks were carried out and copies saved in personnel records.
  • Staff had completed basic life support (BLS) training and arrangements were in place to ensure CPD was monitored effectively.

17 June 2021

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out this announced inspection on 17 June 2021 under section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. We planned the inspection to check whether the registered provider was meeting the legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations. The inspection was led by a Care Quality Commission, (CQC), inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we usually ask five key questions, however due to the ongoing pandemic and to reduce time spent on site, only the following three questions were asked:

• Is it safe?

• Is it effective?

• Is it well-led?

These questions form the framework for the areas we look at during the inspection.

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found this practice was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found this practice was not providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Thanet House Dental Care is in Bexley and provides NHS and private dental care and treatment for adults and children.

There is level access to the practice via a ramp, for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. Car parking spaces, including dedicated parking for people with disabilities, are available near the practice.

The dental team includes the principal dentist, four associate dentists, two dental nurses, two trainee dental nurses, one dental hygiene therapist, one reception manager, one administration manager and two receptionists. The practice has three treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by an individual who is the principal dentist there. They have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the practice is run.

During the inspection we spoke with the principal dentist, one of the associate dentists, two dental nurses, and the administration manager. We looked at practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open:

Monday and Friday - 9.00am to 6.00pm

Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday - 8.00am to 5.00pm

Our key findings were:

  • The practice appeared to be visibly clean and well-maintained.
  • The provider had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance.
  • The provider had safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.
  • The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
  • Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information.
  • Staff provided preventive care and supported patients to ensure better oral health.
  • Staff felt involved and supported and worked as a team.
  • The provider asked staff and patients for feedback about the services they provided.
  • The provider dealt with complaints positively and efficiently.
  • Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available. Some staff required updated medical emergencies training.
  • Improvements were required to the information governance arrangements.
  • Risks associated with staff recruitment procedures had not been suitably identified. Improvements were required to ensure the recruitment procedures reflected current legislation.
  • Improvements were required to the governance systems to help the provider better manage risk to patients and staff.

We identified regulations the provider was not complying with. They must:

  • Establish effective systems and processes to ensure good governance in accordance with the fundamental standards of care.

Full details of the regulation the provider was not meeting are at the end of this report.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements. They should

  • Take action to ensure all clinicians are adequately supported by a trained member of the dental team when treating patients in a dental setting taking into account the guidance issued by the General Dental Council.