Bingham Dental Practice

Updated 22 March 2016

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 15 December 2015. The inspection took place over one day. The inspection team consisted of one CQC inspector and a dentist specialist advisor.

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 therefore formed the framework for the areas we examined during the inspection.

Prior to the inspection we asked the practice to send us some information which we reviewed. This included the complaints they had received in the last 12 months, their latest statement of purpose, the details of their staff members, their qualifications and proof of registration with their professional bodies.

We also reviewed the information we held about the practice as well as information available to the public. We found there were no areas of concern.

During the inspection we spoke with the provider, the practice manager, (one of the principal dentists acted as the practice manager), receptionist, hygienist and two dental nurses. We reviewed a sample of dental records, policies, procedures and other documents held which included some staff files. We reviewed feedback from 43 patients. This included CQC comment cards completed and patients we spoke with on the day.

Updated 22 March 2016

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 15 December 2015 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

Bingham Dental Practice is located within central Bingham, a market town. It is approximately nine miles east of the city of Nottingham and close to Newark-on-Trent. There are good public transport links within the area and a railway station within the town. The practice has car parking available to the front and rear of the building for its patients to use and there is a public car park within short walking distance.

The practice provides private dental services only and treats both adults and children. The practice serves a population of approximately 900. The practice shares the same building as Cromwell Dental Practice which provides mainly NHS dental services. Bingham Dental Practice utilises space within the ground floor of the building.

Both practices are owned by the same provider but run as separate services. Staff employed at the practice do however work within both dental practices depending on daily patient demand and some facilities are shared such as the dental decontamination unit.

There are 12 members of staff working within the practice team. This consisted of four dentists, five dental nurses, one hygienist, a receptionist and a cleaner. The practice manager role is undertaken by one of the principal dentists within the practice.

The practice opening hours are Monday 8am to 6pm, Tuesday 8am to 5.30pm, Wednesday 2pm to 7pm, Thursday 9am to 1pm and Friday 8.30am to 1pm.

We received feedback from 43 patients which included CQC comment cards and patients we spoke with on the day. All feedback included extremely positive comments about the practice and the majority made particular reference to the staff. Comments supported that the practice was able to meet the needs of their patients. A number of comments stated that the dentists were reassuring towards their patients, giving them confidence and able to relax those who felt nervous. One person commented that it was the best practice they had ever belonged to. Remarks were also made regarding the cleanliness of the practice. We did not receive any adverse comments about care and treatment provided at the practice. One comment did however refer to the practice feeling cramped with limited accessibility.

Our key findings were:

• The practice had a system for recording and analysing significant events and complaints and sharing learning with staff.
• Staff had received safeguarding and whistle blowing training and knew the procedures to follow to raise any concerns.
• There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet patients’ needs.
• Practice staff had been trained to handle emergencies and we found that appropriate equipment and medicines were readily available as defined by the UK Resuscitation Council.
• Robust infection control procedures were in place and the practice followed national guidance on decontamination of dental instruments.
• Patients’ care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with evidence based guidelines, best practice and current legislation.
• Patients received clear and detailed explanations about their proposed treatment, costs, options and risks. Patients were therefore able to make informed decisions about their choice in treatments.
• We observed that patients were treated with dignity and respect and confidentiality was maintained.
• The appointment system met patients’ needs for urgent or for more routine appointments.
• The practice was well-led and staff worked as a team. There was an open culture in place whereby staff felt able to raise any issues or concerns.
• Governance systems were effective and there was a range of clinical and non-clinical audits to quality assure the dental services provided.