• Dentist
  • Dentist

Archived: A M Hathi-Dental Practice

153 Hainault Road, Leytonstone, London, E11 1DT (020) 8558 4478

Provided and run by:
Mr. Anil Hathi

All Inspections

13 June 2019

During a routine inspection

We carried out this announced inspection on 13 June 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 Care Quality Commission (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

A M Hathi-Dental Practice is in Leyton, in the London Borough of Waltham Forest. The practice provides predominantly NHS and some private dental treatment to adults and children.

The practice is located on the ground floor in purpose-adapted premises. The practice has two treatment rooms. There is step-free access to the practice. The practice is located close to public transport services.

The dental team includes the principal dentist who owns the practice, one dental nurse, one trainee dental nurse and a dental hygienist who attends the practice one day each week. The clinical team are supported by two receptionists.

The practice is owned by an individual who is the principal dentist there. They 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 our inspection we received feedback from 33 patients.

During the inspection we spoke with the principal dentist, one dental nurse and one receptionist. We checked practice policies and procedures and other records about how the service is managed.

The practice is open:

Mondays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays between 9.15am and 5.15pm.

Tuesdays between 9.15am and 6pm.

The practice is closed each day between 1m and 2pm for lunch.

Our key findings were:

  • The practice appeared clean and well maintained.
  • The practice had infection control procedures in place.
  • 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.
  • The clinical staff provided patients’ care and treatment in line with current guidelines. Improvements were needed so that dental care records were completed taking into account current national guidance.
  • Staff treated patients with dignity and respect and took care to protect their privacy and personal information.
  • The practice was providing preventive care and supporting patients to ensure better oral health.
  • The appointment system met patients’ needs.
  • 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 had arrangements to deal with complaints positively and efficiently.
  • The practice had suitable information governance arrangements.

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

  • Review the practice’s protocols for the use of dental dam for root canal treatment taking into account guidelines issued by the British Endodontic Society.
  • Review the practice’s protocols for recording in the patients’ dental care records or elsewhere the reason for taking the X-ray and quality of the X-ray ensuring compliance with the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations (IRMER) 2017.
  • Review the practice's protocols for completion of dental care records taking into account guidance provided by the Faculty of General Dental Practice regarding clinical examinations and record keeping.
  • Review current policies and procedures for obtaining patient consent to care and treatment and ensure they reflect current legislation and guidance, and that staff follow them at all times.

15 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We observed that the surgery was clean and had a large waiting area. Staff wore clean uniforms and changed into their own clothes when they went home. Staff were able explain the decontamination process.

People told us that they were happy with the care they received and that they did not have to wait long to get an appointment. There were information leaflets displayed about various issues such as, cost of treatment, flossing techniques, and brushing techniques.

We found that treatment records contained past medical history, details of treatment given and advice given to the patient. People told us that the cost of treatment was always explained to them before treatment began.

Staff were given opportunity to continue professional development and had training needs analysed when they started employment and attended annual training for first aid awareness. Staff had knowledge about safeguarding children and vulnerable adults. However, there were no formal appraisal structures in place.

We found that there were risk assessments carried out. The complaints procedure was clearly displayed and people told us that they knew how to make a complaint as and when the need arose.

People's views were sought and acted on. We were told that surveys were done twice a year. We found that people who responded to the survey completed in February 2013 were happy with the service. One person wrote 'the dentist is very gentle and understanding. It is easy to relax while having treatment."