Matas Dental Surgery

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 24 January 2017 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

Matas Dental Practice located in Stratford provides private dental treatment to patients of all ages. The patients visiting the practice were predominantly from the Lithuanian and Russian community.

Practice staffing consists of the principal dentist, one associate dentist, one dental nurse/receptionist and a compliance manager.

The principal dentist is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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.

The practice is open Monday, Wednesday, Friday and Saturday 10am to 7pm

The practice facilities include two treatment rooms, a reception and waiting area, and a decontamination room.

43 patients provided feedback about the service. Patients who completed comment cards were very positive about the care they received from the service. Patients told us that they were happy with the treatment and advice they had received.

Our key findings were:

• Staff had received safeguarding children and adults training and knew the processes to follow to raise any concerns. The practice had whistleblowing policies and procedure and staff were aware of these and their responsibilities to report any concerns.
• The practice had a procedure for handling and responding to complaints, which were displayed and available to patients.
• Staff had been trained to handle medical emergencies, and appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were readily available.
• There were systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. Dental instruments were cleaned and sterilised in line with current guidance.
• Patients were treated with dignity and respect and confidentiality was maintained.
• Patients received clear explanations about their proposed treatment, costs, benefits and risks and were involved in making decisions about it.
• Equipment, such as the autoclaves, fire extinguishers, and X-ray equipment had all been checked for effectiveness and had been regularly serviced.
• The practice sought feedback from patients about the services they provided and acted on this to improve its services.
• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned in line with current guidance such as from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).
• Governance systems were effective and there were a range of policies and procedures in place which underpinned the management of the practice. However infection control audits were not being carried out to monitor the quality of services.

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

• Review the practice's policy and the storage of products identified under Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) 2002 Regulations to ensure a risk assessment is undertaken and the products are stored securely.
• Review the practice’s protocols for the use of rubber dam for root canal treatment giving due regard to guidelines issued by the British Endodontic Society