When we inspected Beech Hill Dental Practice on 8 May 2013, we found the surgery room was clean and instruments were being sterilised appropriately. However, we also found that people were not fully protected from the risk of infection. This was because the decontamination room was dirty and some systems designed to assess the risk of and to prevent, detect and control the spread of infection were lacking, or did not meet specification. We judged this to have a minor impact on people using the service.

We inspected the service again, to check improvements had been made. During this inspection, we found that the decontamination room had been refurbished. We saw that the room and all the fittings appeared clean and in a good state of repair. We saw that all relevant items were appropriately stored and staff had access to a dedicated hand washing sink.

We found that staff were regularly testing and recording water temperatures, as part of the service's measures to prevent a contaminated water supply. We saw that staff were also maintaining records on the flushing (the continuous running of water for a period of time designed to reduce bacterial growth in water lines and pipework) of dental unit water lines (DUWLs).

We saw that the service had an infection control audit process in place and there were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.

The people we spoke with said they received good explanations and relevant advice about their care from the dentist. They told us they had the opportunity to ask questions and felt these were answered satisfactorily. People told us they felt the surgery was clean. They said they had confidence the dentist was a competent professional and had never needed to complain about the service.

During our visit we found each individual's chronology of treatment and any significant discussions had with them to be documented. We found that each individual had their medical history and any risk factors specific to them reviewed and recorded. We saw that arrangements were in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies, including the provision of items for use in an emergency. We found that staff were appropriately registered and receiving some professional development relevant to their roles. We saw the treatment room was clean. However, the decontamination room was not fully fit for purpose, and some processes designed to prevent the risk of infection were lacking or did not meet specification.

We found the service had a complaints system in place and information about the procedure was available to people who use the service.

One person said of Beech Hill Dental Practice: "It's a very good service. The dentist is very nice." Another person said: "The dentist is very helpful and the service is very accommodating."