Westlands Dental Studio

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

We found this practice was providing safe 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 Learning culture is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safe systems, pathways and transitions is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Safeguarding is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

The judgement for Involving people to manage risks is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.

Improvements were needed to the systems in place to identify and manage risks. For example, we discussed the evacuation protocols with the practice manager and noted limited consideration had been made to the evacuation of patients undergoing treatment using conscious sedation from an upstairs surgery.

Hazardous substances were not consistently stored safely and information relating to the safe management of these substances was not available for all materials.

The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter.

Emergency equipment and medicines were available and checked in accordance with national guidance. Staff could access these in a timely way. Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year.

Staff providing treatment to patients under sedation had also completed immediate life support training (or basic life support training plus patient assessment, airway management techniques and automated external defibrillator training).

Staff were encouraged to participate in medical emergency scenario training.

We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions. The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available.

The management of fire safety was effective, and fire exits were clear and well signposted.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff. Improvements were needed to ensure these were effective. We looked at a number of staff files and from the records we were shown, we noted a structured induction had not been carried out for all newly appointed staff.

Staff discussed their learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development during appraisals, clinical discussions, practice team meetings and ongoing informal conversations. However, records were not available to demonstrate appraisals were carried out regularly.

We saw staff carried out continuing professional development. Improvements were needed to the monitoring system to ensure these were effective. From the records we were shown, a number of training records were obtained immediately prior to the assessment. The system did not enable the provider to consistently assure themselves that staff’s training was up-to-date and undertaken at the required intervals.

The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover.

Staff we spoke with had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that on the whole, there were sufficient staffing levels. They demonstrated knowledge of safeguarding and were aware of how safeguarding information could be accessed. Staff knew their responsibilities for safeguarding vulnerable adults and children.

The practice had procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment. This included monthly water temperature monitoring protocols. However, improvements were needed to ensure these were effective at managing risks. From the internal water monitoring records we were shown, the water temperatures recorded at one of the outlets were outside the recommended parameters. This was noted and raised internally; however we could not be assured that appropriate action had been taken to mitigate any risks.

The practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste.

The equipment in use was maintained and serviced as per manufacturers’ instructions.

Staff received appropriate training and demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes.

We observed use of personal protective equipment and the decontamination of used dental instruments, which aligned with national guidance. We saw, and staff confirmed that single use items were not reprocessed.

The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance. However, improvements were needed to ensure these were undertaken every 6 months in accordance with current guidance.

The practice should review the facilities available as part of the infection control procedures and protocols taking into account the guidelines issued by the Department of Health in the Health Technical Memorandum 01-05: Decontamination in primary care dental practices. In particular, the worksurfaces in one of the decontamination rooms were not kept clear to ensure they were easily cleanable and there were no separate handwashing basins provided for staff in either decontamination room. The practice manager confirmed plans were in place to improve the decontamination facilities.

The judgement for Medicines optimisation is based on the latest evidence we assessed for the Safe key question.