fbpx

CQC


Updated 9 October 2017

We carried out this announced follow up inspection on 12 September 2017 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 CQC inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

We had undertaken an unannounced focused inspection of this service on 7 April 2017 as part of our regulatory functions where breaches of legal requirements were found.

After the focused inspection, the practice wrote to us to say what they would do to meet the legal requirements in relation to each of the breaches.

We reviewed the practice against two of the five questions we ask about services: is the service safe and well led? You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Manchester Dental on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

We revisited Manchester Dental as part of this review and checked whether they had followed their action plan and to confirm that they now met the legal requirements. We checked these areas as part of this follow-up comprehensive inspection and found this had been resolved.

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

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

Manchester Dental is located in Urmston, Manchester and provides private treatment to adults and children. The practice also offers private orthodontic treatment, dental implants, occasional intravenous sedation and cosmetic treatments. A chiropodist operates alongside the service but this does not come under our regulation.

There is access for people who use wheelchairs and pushchairs. Car parking spaces, including for patients with disabled badges, are available at the practice with additional on-street parking available.

The dental team includes three dentists, four dental nurses (one of which is a trainee), two dental hygiene therapists and a practice manager. The practice has two treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by a company and as a condition of registration must have a person registered with the Care Quality Commission as the registered manager. Registered managers 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 registered manager at Manchester Dental was the principal dentist.

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

The practice is open from 9am to 6pm Monday, Wednesday and Friday, 9am to 8pm Tuesday, 9am to 5pm Thursday and 9am to 4pm Saturday.

On the day of inspection we reviewed patient feedback and spoke with three patients. This information gave us a positive view of the practice.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice was clean and well maintained.
  • The practice had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance.
  • Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available.
  • The practice had systems to help them manage risk.
  • The practice had suitable safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding adults and children.
  • The practice had thorough staff recruitment procedures.
  • 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.
  • The appointment system met patients’ needs.
  • The practice had effective leadership. Staff felt involved and supported and worked well as a team.
  • The practice asked staff and patients for feedback about the services they provided.
  • The practice dealt with complaints positively and efficiently.

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

  • Review the practice’s arrangements for receiving and responding to patient safety alerts, recalls and rapid response reports issued from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and through the Central Alerting System (CAS), as well as from other relevant bodies such as, Public Health England (PHE).
  • Review the practice’s safeguarding staff training; ensuring it covers both children and adults and all staff are trained to an appropriate level for their role.
  • Review the practice’s arrangements for conscious sedation, ensuring staff involved with this service are aware of roles and responsibilities, giving due regard to 2015 guidelines published by The Intercollegiate Advisory Committee on Sedation in Dentistry in the document ‘Standards for Conscious Sedation in the Provision of Dental Care 2015.

Full report below:

https://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-216614628

Quick Enquiry

    Quick Enquiry
    Need to make an appointment?

    You can now book your next appointment via our online booking system.

    Make an appointment
    ×

    Powered by WhatsApp Chat

    ×