As part of our review we spoke with seven people who used No Worries Dentistry to gain their experiences of the service they received. People we spoke with included two families, people who were nervous, had received extensive treatment, were new to the practice, or had attended the practice since it first opened in 2005. People we spoke with told us they were satisfied with the service they received. One person said, 'It's far better than any other practice I've had in the past.' People told us they were seen on time and were involved in their treatment. They said staff were friendly and welcoming except for one person who reported they had been spoken to in a 'rude' manner on one occasion.
Three people commented there had been a high staff turnover and their appointments had been cancelled on a number of occasions, sometimes at very short notice. Five people told us they had been seen by different dentists and not been forewarned of the change prior to attending for their appointment. One person said, 'I turned up for an appointment and was told it had been cancelled. I had to then wait two weeks before I got another appointment, despite being in pain.' Other people said they had been seen at short notice if they were in pain. One person told us they had requested to change to another dentist within the practice as they considered their treatment had not been carried out as it should have been.
People said they had not received any unnecessary treatment. No one said they had received a copy of their treatment plan detailing their treatment and charges. People told us they had completed a health questionnaire when they first registered with the practice and were asked at each appointment if there had been any changes to their health or any prescribed medication.
People said the practice was always clean and they were satisfied with the standard of cleanliness and hygiene. They told us that clinical staff always wore personal protective clothing such as gloves and eye protection. We found a large amount of instruments in two of the three surgeries that were not dated when sterilised and not all daily checks for checking surgeries for cleanliness were in place. This did not ensure people using the service were protected from the risk of cross infection. Some staff were not complying with the infection control policy in place.
We saw that not all complaints received had been satisfactorily investigated. This did not assure people that their concerns would be listened to and acted on effectively. We found there were insufficient systems in place for the assessment and monitoring of the quality of the service. This meant that people could not be confident that the practice was run safely and effectively.