This regulation relates to cross infection control in dental practices.

It is largely driven from a weak evidence base based around prions.

It has a "best practice" and an "acceptable minimum"

If the evidence is strong enough for best practice, how can it be safe to define a minimum standard without compromising patient safety?

It isnt!! The best / desirable practice level is a classic case of ass covering by legislators. They know it would be prohibitivley expensive and very difficult for most existing practices to implement, especially in a cash limited area such as NHS dentistry. It also gives quangos such as the Care Quality Commission an opportunity to interfere in our practices.

This legislation was bounced around for several years before being issued. It is flawed, and should be revised to remove the nonsensical "best practice" definition. Either we NEED it, or we dont. The overwhelming evidence base is that the "acceptable minimum" is perfectley adequate.

Why is this idea important?

Allowing and trusting us to run our businesses safely as we have for the past 20 years without overbearing regulation.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.