We carried out this announced inspection of Hopton Dental Surgery 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. A CQC inspector, who was supported by two specialist dental advisers, led the 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?

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 well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Hopton Dental Surgery is a well-established practice owned by Dr Susan Allan. It is based in the village of Hopton-On-Sea, near Great Yarmouth and provides mostly NHS treatment to patients of all ages. The dental team includes four part-time dentists, four dental nurses, and a receptionist. The practice has three treatment rooms and is open on Mondays from 8am to 5.30pm; Tuesdays from 9am to 7.30pm; Wednesdays 8am to 5pm; Thursdays from 8am to 5.30pm and Fridays from 9am to 5.30pm. It also opens on a Saturday morning from 9am to 12pm.

There is level entry access for people who use wheelchairs and fully enabled toilet facilities.

The practice is owned by an individual who is the principal dentist there. They have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the practice is run.

On the day of our inspection we collected twenty comment cards filled in by patients: information gave us a very positive view of the service.

During the inspection we spoke with the principal dentist, the associate dentist, two dental nurses and the receptionist. We looked at the practice’s policies and procedures, and other records about how the service was managed.

Our key findings were:

• The practice had systems to help ensure patient safety. These included safeguarding children and adults from abuse, maintaining the required standards of infection prevention and control, and responding to medical emergencies.

• Risk assessment was robust and action was taken to protect staff and patients.

• Patients received their care and treatment from well supported staff, who enjoyed their work.

• The practice offered extended hours opening one evening a week, and on a Saturday.

• Patients’ needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with current best practice guidance from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and other published guidance. Members of the dental team were up-to-date with their continuing professional development and supported to meet the requirements of their professional registration.

• There was a clear leadership structure and staff felt supported and valued by the principal dentist. Teamwork in the practice was excellent. The practice proactively sought feedback from staff and patients, which it acted on.

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

• 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.