Archived: Easingwold Dental Care

We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 15 June 2016 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

Mr Donn Anthony Tomkinson is a NHS and private dental practice which offers private dental payment plans. The practice is located in the centre of Easingwold, North Yorkshire with road side car parking. The practice has two treatment rooms on the ground floor, a reception area, a waiting room, a decontamination room, office and staff facilities.

There are two dentists (the principal and an associate dentist), two dental nurses (one of which is a trainee) and a receptionist.

The practice is open:

Monday – Friday 08:30 – 12:30 13:30 – 17:00

The principal dentist is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) as an individual. 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 18 CQC comment cards providing feedback and spoke with two patients. The patients who provided feedback were very positive about the care and attention to treatment they received at the practice. They told us they were involved in all aspects of their care and found the staff to be a professional, caring, honest and communicated well. Patients commented they could access emergency care easily 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. They had very good systems in place to work closely and share information with the local safeguarding team.
• There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff to meet the needs of patients.
• Staff had been trained to manage medical emergencies.
• 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.
• 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.

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

• Review the protocol and checks for the medical emergency drugs and equipment to ensure all equipment is in date and of the recommended type.
• Review the practice’s protocol for undertaking audits of X-rays at regular intervals to help improve the quality of service. The practice should also ensure all audits have documented learning points so the resulting improvements can be demonstrated and they follow the NPRB guidelines.