Sensura Dental Care

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.

Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year. Staff we spoke with told us that equipment and instruments were well maintained and readily available. The provider described the processes they had in place to identify and manage risks. Staff felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and the reporting of risks was encouraged.

Emergency equipment and medicines were available and checked in accordance with national guidance. Staff could access these in a timely way. We noted that Aspirin was not dispersible. We have since received photographic evidence to confirm that the correct type of Aspirin is in place. The premises were clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were not clearly labelled. We have since received photographic evidence to confirm that signs are now placed appropriately. Hazardous materials were not secured to prevent unauthorised access. We have since been advised a lock will be fitted over the weekend of the 31 August 2024. We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions. Improvements were needed to ensure fire safety management was effective. Fire exits were clear and well signposted, and fire safety equipment was serviced and well maintained. Records showed that the monthly testing of emergency lights had not been carried out since February 2024. A carbon monoxide detector was not present near the location of the gas boiler. A general waste bin was stored at the front of the building. It was not secure, or tethered to a fixed point, to prevent unauthorised interference and possible arson. We have since received photographic evidence to confirm that these shortfalls have been addressed.

The practice ensured equipment was safe to use and maintained and serviced according to manufacturers’ instructions. The practice ensured the facilities were maintained in accordance with regulations. A fire safety risk assessment was carried out on 9 August 2024 in line with the legal requirements. The results of the risk assessment were not known at the time of our visit as the report had not yet been completed. A Five-yearly electrical installation condition report (EICR) test was completed the day before our visit. The results of which were not known at the time of our visit as the report had not yet been completed. The practice had arrangements to ensure the safety of the X-ray equipment and the required radiation protection information was available. This included cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) X-ray equipment. The practice had risk assessments to minimise the risk that could be caused from substances that are hazardous to health. The practice had implemented systems to assess, monitor and manage risks to patient and staff safety. This included sharps safety, sepsis awareness and lone working. Improvement was needed to ensure that nursing staff did not dismantle matrix bands as this was against the practice sharps risk assessment. We have since received evidence to confirm that this shortfall has been addressed. The practice had systems for appropriate and safe handling of medicines. Antimicrobial prescribing audits were carried out.

Staff we spoke with had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that there were sufficient staffing levels. Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued. They were proud to work in the practice. Staff discussed their training needs during annual appraisals, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions. They also discussed learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development. Staff we spoke with 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 a recruitment policy and procedure to help them employ suitable staff, including for agency staff. These reflected the relevant legislation. The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover. Newly appointed staff had a structured induction, and clinical staff completed continuing professional development required for their registration with the General Dental Council. We saw the practice had effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities. The practice had arrangements to ensure staff training was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals but improvement was needed. We reviewed a selection of staff training records and found that learning disability and autism training for one member of staff was not available and four hours IR(ME)R/radiography training, in the previous 5 years, for one member of staff was not available. We have since received evidence to confirm that training for both subjects has now been carried out.

Staff told us how they ensured the premises and equipment were clean and well maintained. They demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes. Staff told us that single use items were not reprocessed.

The practice appeared clean and there was an effective schedule in place to ensure it was kept clean. We noted that cleaning equipment was not stored separately to prevent cross contamination. We have since been advised that improvement works will be carried out over the weekend of the 31 August 2024. Improvements were needed to the maintenance of practice environment. The staff area floor covering was damaged and the paint finish on the staff toilet wall was damaged. Improvements were needed to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) to ensure that heavy duty gloves were changed at appropriate intervals (weekly). We have since received photographic evidence to confirm this shortfall has been addressed. Hazardous waste was segregated and disposed of safely. We observed the decontamination of used dental instruments aligned with national guidance. But storage arrangements needed improving. Specifically, open pouches of X-ray holders were seen in treatment Room 2. We have since received photographic evidence to confirm this shortfall has been addressed.

The practice had infection control procedures which reflected published guidance and the equipment in use. Staff had appropriate training, and the practice completed Infection prevention and control (IPC) audits in line with current guidance. The practice had procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment. The practice had policies and procedures in place to ensure clinical waste was segregated and stored appropriately in line with guidance.

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