Langley Road Dental Practice

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.

The practice had processes to identify and manage risks and staff we spoke with were able to describe these to us. Staff felt confident that risks were well managed at the practice, and this was reflected in our findings. 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. We saw satisfactory records of servicing and validation of equipment in line with manufacturer’s instructions. Improvements should be made to ensure that the appropriate maintenance of the emergency lighting was carried out, waste bins that were stored at the front of the building were protected from unauthorised interference and carbon monoxide detectors were positioned appropriately near to boilers. The provider took immediate action and provided assurance these shortfalls have been addressed. The practice had systems for appropriate and safe handling of medicines. Antimicrobial prescribing audits were carried out.

The practice had a recruitment policy and procedures that reflected relevant legislation, to help them employ suitable staff. The practice ensured clinical staff were qualified, registered with the General Dental Council and had appropriate professional indemnity cover. Newly appointed staff had an appropriate role specific structured induction. Staff we spoke with had the skills, knowledge and experience to carry out their roles. They told us that 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 arrangements to ensure staff training, including continuing professional development, was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. There were effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities. Staff discussed their learning needs, general wellbeing and aims for future professional development during annual appraisals, practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions. Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice.

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance. 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 had effective procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment. The practice had protocols to ensure effective cleaning and safe segregation and disposal of hazardous waste. Improvement was needed to ensure that the clinical waste storage cupboard at the rear of the premises displayed a warning sign to alert people about the existence of the waste. The provider took immediate action and provided assurance this shortfall has been addressed. The equipment in use was maintained and serviced as per manufacturers’ instructions. We noted that the autoclave machine validation test type was not specific to the cycle being used. We were assured this would be corrected with immediate effect. The practice completed infection prevention and control audits in line with current guidance.

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