Oxford Orthodontic Centre

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; staff we spoke with were able to describe these to us. Staff demonstrated an open culture in relation to people’s safety. 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. Staff knew how to respond to a medical emergency and had completed training in emergency resuscitation and basic life support every year. The premises were visibly clean, well maintained and free from clutter. Hazardous substances were labelled appropriately. Storage areas were not secured to prevent unauthorised interference. Cleaning equipment was not stored separately to reduce the risk of cross contamination. Effective systems were not in place to ensure that the material covers on waiting area seating were kept clean. Improvements could be made to ensure that cleaning standard checks were recorded appropriately. Since our visit we have received evidence to confirm all of these shortfalls have been addressed. 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 however we noted the area used to house x-ray equipment was not monitored by staff which placed it at risk of unauthorised interference. Since our visit this shortfall has been addressed. 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, including agency or locum staff. 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, which included safeguarding. Improvements could be made to ensure that agency staff inductions were recorded appropriately. The provider ensured clinical staff completed continuing professional development required for their registration with the General Dental Council. Improvement was needed to ensure staff training was up-to-date and reviewed at the required intervals. Evidence of safeguarding children and adults at risk training (specific to role) for 2 staff was not available. Evidence of fire safety training for 3 staff was not available. Evidence of infection prevention and control training for 1 staff member was not available. Evidence of three hours IR(ME)R/radiography training was not available for a clinician. Since our visit this shortfall has been addressed. One staff member’s basic life support training lapsed the month before our visit. We have since received evidence to confirm training has been booked to take place in January 2025. There were also effective processes to support and develop staff with additional roles and responsibilities. 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. Staff stated they felt respected, supported and valued, and they were proud to work in the practice. Staff discussed their training needs during annual appraisals and practice team meetings and ongoing informal discussions.

The practice had infection control procedures that reflected published guidance. This included procedures to reduce the risk of Legionella, or other bacteria, developing in water systems, in line with a risk assessment. The practice had cleaning procedures and schedules to ensure effective cleaning. We observed the decontamination of used orthodontic instruments, which aligned with national guidance. Staff received appropriate training and demonstrated knowledge and awareness of infection prevention and control processes. The equipment in use was maintained and serviced as per manufacturers’ instructions. We saw, and staff confirmed that single use items were not reprocessed. Staff followed infection control principles, including the use of personal protective equipment, and safely segregated and disposed of hazardous waste. Improvements were needed to ensure that the floor surfaces in the treatment room 5 was complete and impervious. Since our visit this shortfall has been addressed. 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.