Eastgate House Dental Surgery

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

We found this practice was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations and had taken into consideration appropriate guidance.

Find out what we look at when we assess this area in our information about our new Single assessment framework.

The judgement for Assessing needs is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

Patients told us they were given clear information to help them make an informed choice about their treatment and any associated costs. They were involved in decisions about their care. Patients told us that they were supported to maintain their oral health and were provided with appropriate information and resources.

The provider had systems to ensure that people who used the service received person-centred care and treatment that was appropriate, met their needs and was reflective of their personal preferences. The principal dentist confirmed, where applicable, they referred patients to a range of specialists in primary and secondary care for treatment the practice did not provide. The practice provided preventive care and supported patients to ensure better oral health. Staff were aware of national oral health campaigns and local schemes which supported patients to live healthier lives. Staff felt the practice supported them to develop and enabled them to take on lead roles and responsibilities. Staff worked together and with other health and social care professionals to deliver effective care and treatment. Staff demonstrated their understanding of the need to obtain patients’ consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance. They understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.   Staff described how they involved patients’ relatives or carers when appropriate and made sure they had enough time to explain treatment options clearly. Staff worked together and with other health and social care professionals to deliver effective care and treatment. Staff had systems for referring patients with suspected cancer under the national two-week wait arrangements.

Staff had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles.  The practice had some systems to keep dental professionals up to date with current evidence-based practice. The practice offered conscious sedation for patients. Improvements were required to ensure the provider had oversight of the sedation treatment provided. Specifically, conscious sedation training for one staff member was not available. The risks associated with having one oxygen cylinder available and treating patients under sedation at the same time as other patients in the practice had not been considered. The provider could not demonstrate that the sedation equipment used was serviced and calibrated as per manufacturer's instructions. We looked at 6 patient care records. The information recorded in these patient care records was in line with recognised guidance. Staff obtained patients’ consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance. Patient treatment care record audits were not carried out for the hygienists. Improvements could be made to include all clinical staff in auditing processes. We saw the provision of dental implants was in accordance with national guidance. Staff obtained patients’ consent to care and treatment in line with legislation and guidance. They understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The practice offered facial cosmetic treatments in accordance with national guidance. We saw evidence the dentists justified, graded and reported on the radiographs they took. Radiography and antibiotic prescribing audits were carried out, but results were not clinician specific. Improvements could be made to identify clinicians so improvement plans could be assigned appropriately. The practice did not have effective systems for appropriate and safe handling of medicines. NHS prescriptions and medicines were not monitored to prevent fraudulent misuse.

The judgement for How staff, teams and services work together is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Supporting people to live healthier lives is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Monitoring and improving outcomes is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.

The judgement for Consent to care and treatment is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Effective key question.