We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 23 February 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

The Wrekenton Dental Practice is owned and run by Dr. Benedict Liversidge and Dr. Jill Canty. They are both independently registered with the Care Quality Commission and as such there are two reports for the practice. They each have their own patients and surgery. They share staff and the facilities which include a decontamination area and a reception and waiting room. The practice offers primary care dentistry under the NHS, and private dental care.

The practice is open Monday to Thursday 8.30am to 5.30pm and Friday 8.30am to 4pm.

There are two dentists, two dental nurses, one trainee dental nurse, a receptionist/practice manager.

Dr. Benedict Liversidge is a registered provider for the practice. Registered providers 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 spoke with the dentists, two dental nurses, one trainee dental nurse and the receptionist/practice manager.

On the day of inspection we received five CQC comment cards providing feedback. The patients who provided feedback were very positive about the care and attention to treatment they received at the practice. They told us they found the staff to be welcoming and professional.

Our key findings were:

• There was an effective complaints system.
• Staff had received safeguarding training, knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report it.
• There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of patients.
• Staff had been trained to manage medical emergencies.
• Infection control procedures were in accordance with the published guidelines.
• Patient care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with evidence based guidelines and current regulations.
• Patients received clear explanations about their proposed treatment, costs, benefits and risks, and were involved in making decisions about it.
• Patients were treated with dignity and respect and confidentiality was maintained.
• Patients could access routine treatment and urgent care when required.
• The practice was well-led, staff felt involved and supported and worked well as a team.
• The governance systems were effective.
• The practice sought feedback from staff and patients about the services they provided in order to make improvements where needed.

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

• Review availability of equipment to manage medical emergencies giving due regard to guidelines issued by the Resuscitation Council (UK).

• Review the storage of dental care materials and medicines requiring refrigeration to ensure they are stored in line with the manufacturer’s guidance and the fridge temperature is monitored and recorded.

• Review the practice’s protocols for justifying the taking of X-rays giving due regard to the Faculty of General Dental Practice (FGDP) guidance on the “Selection Criteria for Dental Radiography”.

• Review the practice’s infection control procedures and protocols giving due regard to guidelines issued by the Department of Health - Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices and The Health and Social Care Act 2008: ‘Code of Practice about the prevention and control of infections and related guidance.

We saw people were given appropriate information about the service and the care and treatment they received. We spoke with two people who used the service who told us they understood the care and treatment choices available to them. One person told us, "The dentist is very good, very friendly. He made me feel at ease. He explained everything and was very clear. He asked me at the end if there was anything I wasn't sure about, but he'd gone over everything well."

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people’s safety and welfare. People told us they were happy with the care and treatments they had received. One person said, "I went in to register as a patient and mentioned to the receptionist I had pain with one of my teeth. She managed to get me an appointment straight away and the dentist sorted the pain. I was grateful they managed to sort me out so quickly." Another person said, "It's a very good service, I’m not a great one for the dentist, but since I’ve been a patient there I don't worry about going."

Staff training was kept up to date so that staff could care for people safely and to an appropriate standard.

We found people were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed.

There was an effective system in place to monitor and assess the quality of the service.