We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 17 November 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

Cottingham Dental Practice is a dental service that provides private endodontic, implant treatment and inhalation sedation. The practice is located in Cottingham, in the East Riding of Yorkshire and close to the city of Hull.

The premises have been refurbished to a high standard and there is ground floor level access to the reception area, waiting room, a treatment room and toilet facilities. One the first floor another surgery is situated and a decontamination room, a dental panoramic X-ray room and the staff room.

There are two dentists, two hygiene therapists, a hygienist, two dental nurses, one of which is a trainee and a practice manager.

The practice is open:

Monday, Tuesday and Thursday 08:45 - 13:00 14:00 -17:30

Wednesday 10:00-13:00 – 14:00 -18:30

Friday 08:00 – 15:00

The practice owner 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.

On the day of inspection we received 45 CQC comment cards providing feedback and spoke to three patients. The patients who provided feedback were positive about the care and treatment they received at the practice. They told us they were involved in all aspects of their care and found the staff to be friendly, respectful, professional and caring and they were treated with dignity and respect in a clean and tidy environment.

Our key findings were:

• Staff had received safeguarding training, knew how to recognise signs of abuse and how to report it.
• Staff had been trained to manage medical emergencies.
• Infection prevention and control procedures were in accordance with the published guidelines.
• Patient care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with evidence based guidelines, best practice and current regulations.
• 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 patients’ needs.
• There was a complaints system in place. Staff recorded complaints and cascaded learning to staff.
• The governance systems were effective.
• The practice sought feedback from staff and patients about the services they provided.

There were areas where the provider could make improvements and should:

• Review audits of various aspects of the service, such as radiography, dental care records and sedation are undertaken at regular intervals to help improve the quality of service. The  practice should also ensure all audits have documented learning points and the resulting improvements can be demonstrated. In regard to the sedation audit this should take into consideration the Standards of Conscious Sedation in the provision of Dental Care 2015.

We spoke with the dentist, a dental nurse, the practice manager and three patients on the day of our visit.

Patients told us that they were satisfied with the treatment they had received. Their options for treatment and the cost of their treatment had been explained to them before they had consented to the treatment. Patient notes included a medical history and the copy of a treatment plan.

We found that the practice was maintained in a clean and hygienic condition. This was confirmed by the patients who we spoke with. One patient said, “The premises are clean, clinical and calming”.

The premises had been refurbished to a high standard and provided level access for people into the ground floor of the premises. There was a reception area, a consulting room, a waiting room, a treatment room and toilet facilities on the ground floor.

Staff had received appropriate training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), dealing with medical emergencies, safeguarding adults and children from abuse and infection control. We saw records that evidenced staff had kept their continuous professional development (CPD) up to date.

There was a complaints system in place and we saw evidence that any complaints made had been dealt with appropriately.