Ormond Terrace Dental

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.

Systems in place ensured people using the service received person-centred care and treatment that was appropriate, met their needs and reflected their preferences. Preventive oral health care was encouraged. The majority of staff kept up to date with evidence-based practice, and had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. The practice offered dental implants. Staff kept detailed records and had access to the appropriate equipment for the placement of implants. The practice offered conscious sedation for patients. Systems followed included checks before and after treatment, emergency equipment requirements, medicines management, sedation equipment checks, and staff availability and training. These checks failed to identify that evidence of training for staff delivering and supporting in sedation, was up to date. Checks had not identified that oxygen held for use in an emergency was below the recommended requirements. We looked at a sample of patient care records. Details recorded in care records was not in line with recognised guidance. Where patients had treatment under sedation, evidence of consent records and discharge protocol was not recorded. Staff described to us how they obtained patients’ consent for treatment in line with legislation and guidance and understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff described how they involved patients’ carers when appropriate and ensured they had time to explain treatment options. We saw evidence the dentists justified, graded and reported on radiographs they took. The practice had systems for safe handling and prescribing of medicines. This was not routinely followed. The labelling of medicines did not meet requirements of the Human Medicines Regulations 2012. Where applicable patients were referred to primary and secondary care for treatment the practice did not provide, including referring patients with suspected cancer under national Fast track arrangements.

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.