We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 21 July 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

46 Phillin Limited offers NHS dental care services to patients of all ages. The services provided include preventative advice and treatment and routine restorative and some private dental options, for example white fillings. The practice has waiting areas and treatment rooms on the ground floor and first floor.

The practice has five dentists, three who work part time; they are supported by three dental hygiene therapists, dental nurses, receptionists and a practice manager. The principal dentist is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the practice is run.

Our key findings were:

• The practice recorded and analysed significant events and complaints and cascaded learning to staff.
• Where mistakes had been made patients were notified about the outcome of any investigation and given a suitable apology.
• There were effective systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection.
• There were systems in place to check all equipment had been serviced regularly.
• Staff had received safeguarding and whistleblowing training and knew the processes to follow to raise any concerns.
• Patient’s care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with evidence based guidelines, best practice and current legislation.
• The practice ensured staff maintained the necessary skills and competence to support the needs of patients.
• There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of patients.
• Staff had been trained to handle emergencies and appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were readily available.
• 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.
• The appointment system met the needs of patients and waiting times were kept to a minimum.
• There was an effective complaints system and the practice was open and transparent with patients if a mistake had been made.
• The practice was well-led and staff felt involved and worked as a team.
• Governance systems were effective and there was a range of clinical and non-clinical audits to monitor the quality of services.

The practice sought feedback from staff and patients about the services they provided.

During our visit we spoke with people who had attended the surgery for treatment that day.

People told us that they were very happy with the care provided by the service. People told us that all the staff were friendly and polite and put them at their ease. All the people we spoke with said they had been patients for a number of years. Three people told us the practice had been recommended to them by a friend or relative.