Archived: Castle Dental Care

We carried out this announced inspection on 20 August 2019 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. The inspection was led by a CQC inspector who was supported by a specialist dental adviser.

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 providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Background

Castle Dental Care is in Lincoln, a Cathedral City and the county town of Lincolnshire. It provides private dental treatment to adults and children.

There is level access for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs with the use of a ramp over the front door step. The practice does not have its own car park, but public car parking spaces are available directly outside the practice on the road.

The dental team includes two dentists and three dental nurses who share receptionist duties. The practice has one treatment room, on ground floor level.

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 inspection, we collected 32 CQC comment cards filled in by patients.

During the inspection we spoke with one dentist and two dental nurses. We looked at practice policies and procedures, patient feedback and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open: Mondays, Thursdays and Fridays and alternate Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 9am to 5pm.

Our key findings were:

• The practice appeared clean and well maintained.
• The provider had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance.
• Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available, although we noted some items of equipment missing. For example, a child self-inflating bag with reservoir, some sizes of clear face masks for the self-inflating bag and a child oxygen face mask with reservoir and tubing. We were sent some order confirmation details after our inspection.
• The provider had systems to help them manage risk to patients and staff.
• The provider had suitable safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.
• The provider had staff recruitment procedures, although no new staff had been recruited for many years.
• The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
• Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information.
• Staff provided preventive care and supported patients to ensure better oral health.
• The appointment system took account of patients’ needs.
• The provider had effective leadership and culture of continuous improvement.
• Staff felt involved and supported and worked well as a team.
• The provider asked staff and patients for feedback about the services they provided.
• The provider had systems and processes to manage complaints; none had been received.
• The provider had suitable information governance arrangements.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements. They should:

• Take action to ensure the suitability of the premises and ensure all areas are fit for the purpose for which they are being used. In particular ensuring that five yearly electrical testing is completed.

• Take action to complete a risk assessment for staff whose immunity to Hepatitus B is not known.