This inspection was carried out to follow up on two compliance actions issued at the last inspection on 20 May 2014.

The practice needed to improve how they monitored the service to ensure patient views were taken into account and acted upon to improve the service provided.

The practice had not acted appropriately when identifying actions to improve its infection control practices following an internal audit.

The provider sent us an action plan and told us they would be compliant by 30 September 2014.

We found on this inspection that the practice had made improvements to meet the compliance actions set. The registered manager and provider monitored the service and improvements identified were actioned. On this occasion we did not speak with patients during our inspection.

There was an effective system in place to gain feedback from patients about the quality of the service provided to enable the service to improve patient experience.

The practice had improved its standards and systems to protect patients from the risk of acquiring an infection.

On the day of our visit we spoke with seven patients who were complimentary about the practice. All felt they were treated with respect and dignity and they received a good service. All seven patients told us they were informed about their treatment and alternatives and possible outcomes of the treatment offered. They said that treatment plans were always discussed with them and their consent obtained before any treatment started.

One patient said they were happy with the way the dentists communicated with them and they knew all about their treatment plan and costs. They did find it frustrating that they had to fill in a full medical history form on each visit rather than an update and had come in early to do this. Otherwise they were happy. Most patients we spoke with commented on excessive form filling but were generally very satisfied with their dental care.

Another patient said they were generally “pretty satisfied with treatment, I like the dentist, I think she is very good, she does things very well”. Patients said they could make appointments but it depended on the time of day they called in as to whether they could get through easily. Staff also raised this as an issue.

Patients told us when they got through they could make an appointment at times that suited them, and reminders were sent in their preferred form. For example, text message or phone calls. They told us they were aware of the emergency number and had always been able to get an appointment within 24 hours. One patient commented “They all seem a nice team”. One patient told us "This is an excellent practice, I've been coming for years and so have all the family". All seven patients we spoke with felt safe, confident and comfortable with the practice staff.

When we discussed comments with the practice manager they agreed with the patients that there were some areas for improvement and were looking at improving and monitoring repetitive form filling and telephone access for patients.

We observed that although the practice in general was clean and hygienic, the decontamination environments and practices did not always meet the requirements as set out in the Department of Health's - Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices (HTM01-05).

The practice had access for patients with mobility issues and wheelchair users through the front of the building. However, as the premises are a converted older style building, the facilities are not large enough to accommodate wheelchairs. We saw patients with mobility limitations were offered ground floor appointments and dentists were able to move rooms to provide that service.

Staff were supported by the provider to carry out their role to meet people’s needs to an appropriate standard.

We saw effective systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

People who used the service told us they were happy with the treatment provided at Canon Street Dental Centre. They told us they found the dentist they visited was “fantastic” and “really friendly”. One person said they were really nervous about attending the dentist from previous experience and the dentist used humour to make them feel more at ease and they no longer worried about when they attended the dentist.

People we spoke with told us they were given clear explanations about what treatment they required and knew what to expect. We were told people were given options and information about the treatment most suited to their needs. They told us they were aware of what fees they needed to pay. If they needed more complex treatment they would be informed of the cost before they decided to go ahead with the treatment.

Some people we spoke with told us they sometimes found that staff on reception could be “a bit sharp” or “short” with them either on the phone or at the reception desk. We spoke with the manager about this who told us they had previously provided training for staff after similar feedback from people who used the service. The manager assured us this would be monitored.

We spoke with four people who used the service. They told us they were able to make routine appointments easily. People told us if they required an emergency appointment, the practice usually provided this on the same day their request was made.

We spoke with four people who use the service who told us they were able to make routine appointments easily. People told us if they required an emergency appointment, the practice usually provided this on the same day their request was made.