We spoke to three people who used the service who told us they were given appropriate information and support regarding their treatment options and costs. They were positive about the care and treatment they received. They told us that appointments were flexible to meet their needs and the practice was accessible and clean. Some comments made were; -“My dentist is very good. They put me at ease.” “I’m happy with the service, the treatment and costs are made clear.” “The service is good. I can see a dentist when I need to.”

We found that there were practices in place to ensure that good standards were maintained. Audits of equipment, health and safety, infection control and staff training were undertaken. Feedback from the people who used the service was gathered through surveys and a comments and suggestion box. The practice also had a clear complaint procedure.

We found that the people who used the service were given information around their treatment options and health care advice were needed. The surgeries and reception areas were clean. The staff had been provided with training to enable them to appropriately support the health and care needs of the people who used the service.

We carried out this announced inspection on 24 January 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

Bupa - Runcorn Road, Barnton is near Northwich and provides NHS and private dental care for adults and children.

There is level access for people who use wheelchairs and those with pushchairs. The practice has a small car park.

The dental team includes eight dentists, six dental nurses, (two of whom are trainees), two dental hygienists, two receptionists, a care co-ordinator and a practice manager. The practice has five treatment rooms.

The practice is owned by a company and as a condition of registration must have a person registered with the Care Quality Commission as the registered manager. Registered managers have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the practice is run. The registered manager at Bupa - Runcorn Road, Barnton is the practice manager.

On the day of inspection, we collected ten CQC comment cards filled in by patients. We also received feedback from one patient via the CQC website.

During the inspection we spoke with dentists, dental nurses, receptionists, the practice manager and the regional compliance lead. We looked at practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open:

Monday to Thursday 8:00am to 8:00pm

Friday 8:00am to 5:00pm

Saturday 9:00am to 5:00pm.

Our key findings were:

• The provider had infection control procedures in place which staff followed.
• Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life support equipment were available.
• The provider had safeguarding processes in place and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.
• Some risks to patients and staff had not been reduced sufficiently.
• The provider had staff recruitment procedures in place.
• The dental team provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
• Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their personal information.
• Staff provided preventive care and supported patients to achieve better oral health.
• The appointment system took account of patients’ needs.
• The practice had a leadership structure and a 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.
• Staff dealt with complaints positively and efficiently.
• The provider had information governance arrangements in place.

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

• Review the practice’s protocols for checking the immunity of relevant staff to vaccine preventable infectious diseases and assessing risk where immunity is inadequate.
• Review the practice’s systems for environmental cleaning taking into account current guidance.
• Review the practice's protocols and procedures for the use of X-ray equipment in compliance with The Ionising Radiations Regulations 2017 and Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations 2017, and taking into account the guidance for Dental Practitioners on the Safe Use of X-ray Equipment.