Woolton Dental Practice

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We found this practice was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year. Staff we spoke with told us that equipment and instruments were well maintained and readily available. The provider described the processes they had in place to identify and manage risks. Staff felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and the reporting of risks was encouraged. We highlighted there was no sharps risk assessment available on the day and the practice manager completed it on 13 June 2024. There was no lone worker risk assessment for the external cleaner.

Most emergency equipment and medicines were available and checked in accordance with national guidance. Staff could access these in a timely way. However, dispersible 300mg aspirin and a self-inflating bag with reservoir (adult) were missing. Adult defibrillator pads and needles for administration of adrenaline were expired. These were ordered immediately. Systems were in place to ensure the practice was kept clean, but they were not always followed. We observed the decontamination room was cluttered which restricted use of the handwashing sink. Hazardous substances were clearly labelled and stored safely. We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions. However, the boiler service was overdue. This was booked for 25 June 2024. Fire exits were clear and well signposted, and fire extinguishers were serviced and well maintained. The service for the fire alarm and emergency lighting was booked for 17 June 2024.

The practice ensured most equipment was safe to use and maintained and serviced according to manufacturers’ instructions. The practice ensured most of the facilities were maintained in accordance with regulations. A fire safety risk assessment was carried out in line with the legal requirements. The management of fire safety was effective. The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available. The practice had risk assessments to minimise the risk that could be caused from substances that are hazardous to health. The practice had implemented systems to assess, monitor and manage risks to patient and staff safety. This included sepsis awareness. Risk assessments for lone working and sharps safety were completed on 12 June 2024. The practice had systems for appropriate and safe handling of medicines. Antimicrobial prescribing audits were carried out. However, one box of amoxicillin was unaccounted for on the day.

Staff we spoke with had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were sufficient staffing levels. Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued. They were proud to work in the practice. Staff discussed their training needs during team meetings and ongoing informal discussions. They also discussed learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development. Staff we spoke with demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedure to help them employ suitable staff, including for agency or locum staff. These reflected the relevant legislation. The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover. Newly appointed staff had a structured induction, and clinical staff completed continuing professional development required for their registration with the General Dental Council. The practice had arrangements to ensure staff training was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. However, fire safety training was overdue for most members of staff. We saw the practice had effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities.

Staff told us how they ensured the premises and equipment were clean and well maintained. Improvements could be made in the decontamination room regarding clutter and the maintenance of the fire alarm and emergency lighting. They demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes. Staff told us that single use items were not reprocessed.

The practice appeared clean and there was an effective schedule in place to ensure it was kept clean, but they were not always followed. We observed the decontamination room was cluttered which restricted use of the handwashing sink. Staff did not complete environmental cleaning logs consistently. Staff followed infection control principles, including the use of personal protective equipment (PPE). We highlighted that the magnifying light was broken and a new one was ordered on the day. Hazardous waste was segregated and disposed of safely. However, the clinical waste bins contained sacks over 3 weeks old. Collections had been stopped due a contract issue. We observed the decontamination of used dental instruments, which aligned with national guidance.

The practice had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance and the equipment in use. Staff had appropriate training, and the practice completed Infection prevention and control (IPC) audits in line with current guidance. An IPC audit was last completed in September 2021. A new audit was completed on 12 June 2024 and an action plan created. The practice had procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment. The practice had policies and procedures in place to ensure clinical waste was segregated and stored appropriately in line with guidance. However, 1 of the clinical waste bins contained cardboard boxes and a broken chair.

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.