We carried out this announced inspection on 31 July 2017 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.

Our key findings were:

• The practice was clean and well maintained. However, there was scope for the practice to assess the risk of cross infection from equipment used by the cleaning company to clean the premises.
• The practice had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance.
• Patients provided positive feedback about the service and the staff.
• Staff knew how to deal with emergencies. Appropriate medicines and life-saving equipment were available.
• The practice had systems to help them manage risk.
• The practice had suitable safeguarding processes and staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding adults and children.
• The practice had thorough staff recruitment procedures. Photographic ID was not stored in staff records.
• The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines.
• Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information.
• The appointment system met patients’ needs. Patients reported they could get appointments when they needed them.
• The practice had effective leadership. Staff felt involved and supported and worked well as a team.
• The practice asked staff and patients for feedback about the services they provided.
• The practice valued patient feedback and had a process to deal with complaints positively and efficiently.

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

• Review the practice’s systems in place for environmental cleaning taking into account current national guidelines.
• Review the practice's recruitment policy and procedures to ensure accurate, complete and detailed records are maintained for all staff.
• Introduce and embed protocols regarding the prescribing and recording of antibiotic medicines taking into account guidance provided by the Faculty of General Dental Practice in respect of antimicrobial prescribing.