Archived: Tudor House Dental Practice

Updated 15 February 2017

The inspection was carried out on 5th October 2016 by a CQC inspector and a dental specialist advisor. We reviewed information received from the provider prior to the inspection. On the day of our inspection we looked at practice’s policies and protocols, clinical patient records and other records relating to the management of the service. We spoke with the provider (who was the principal dentist), the dental nurses, the dental hygienist, the practice manager and the receptionist. We reviewed 23 Care Quality Commission (CQC) comment cards that had been completed by patients in the two weeks prior to our inspection.

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?

This informed our view of the care provided and the management of the practice.

Updated 15 February 2017

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 5th October 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

Tudor House Dental Practice a mixed NHS and private general dental practice in Ashtead, Surrey. The premises are located above an estate agency on a high street next to rows of retail shops and businesses. The premises are not suitable for patients using a wheelchair as there are stairs leading to the practice. There are two dental treatment rooms, a reception and waiting area and an office that can also be used as a staff room.

The practice staffing consisted of a principal dentist who was also the provider, an associate dentist, a practice manager, two dental nurses, a receptionist and two dental hygienists.

The principal dentist is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as an individual. 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.

We reviewed 23 Care Quality Commission (CQC) comment cards that had been completed by patients in the two weeks prior to our inspection. Common themes were patients felt they received excellent care from friendly staff who were professional, caring and understanding. They also commented that the dentist had a nice manner that made nervous patients feel relaxed.

Our key findings were:

• There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. We found the treatment rooms and equipment were visibly clean.

• There were systems in place to check equipment had been serviced regularly, including the dental air compressor, autoclaves, fire extinguishers and the X-ray equipment.

• We found the dentist regularly assessed each patient’s gum health and took X-rays at appropriate intervals.

• The practice kept up to date with current guidelines when considering the care and treatment needs of patients.

• Staff had been trained to handle emergencies and appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were readily available.
• There was an induction programme for staff to follow which ensured they were skilled and competent in delivering safe and effective care and support to patients.
• The practice ensured staff maintained the necessary skills and competence to support the needs of patients.
• Patients received clear explanations about their proposed treatment, and its costs, benefits and risks and were involved in making decisions about it.
• Patients were treated with dignity and respect and confidentiality was maintained.
• The appointment system met the needs of patients and waiting times were kept to a minimum.
• There was an effective complaints system and the practice was open and transparent with patients if a mistake had been made.
• Staff demonstrated knowledge of the practice whistleblowing policy and were confident they would raise a concern about another staff member’s performance if it was necessary.

• At our visit we observed staff were kind, caring and very welcoming.