Dentistry

CHAPTER 43 Dentistry





Liability claims for alleged dental malpractice have been somewhat “under the radar” compared to medicine. However, dentists are held to the same set of rules as physicians and other health professionals with regard to the tort of malpractice, the most common legal theory used by plaintiff patients to secure remuneration for alleged wrongs.1


One of the most common bases for claims for damages in dentistry is for removal of the “wrong” tooth, a somewhat limited scope of damage. However, often the damage associated with alleged dental malpractice can be more severe, e.g., the N2 paste endodontic sequelae of the 1980s.2,3 Ultimately dental treatment can result in any complication seen with medical treatment, including death. Several reviews of the actual statistics related to alleged dental malpractice are available, although differing findings are seen. For instance, Seidberg reports that 15–25% of claims from various insurance sources include endodontics, simple extractions, and crown/bridge work.4 Sanbar reports that private practitioners are those most often sued and that claims usually involve faulty management/performance of treatment, unsatisfactory technical/esthetic quality, and wrong diagnosis/indication.5 Governmental reports from the U.S. National Practitioner Data Bank, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department of Justice are seen in Table 43-1.


Table 43-1 Dentistry malpractice statistics



















Medical malpractice lawsuit payment statistics for dentist malpractice in the U.S.A:


Medical malpractice lawsuit payment report statistics for dentist malpractice in the U.S.A.:

Medical malpractice lawsuit statistics for dental malpractice in the U.S.A.:




Medical malpractice statistics for the U.S.A. 2003:


Medical malpractice statistics for the U.S.A. 2003:


Medical malpractice statistics for the U.S.A. 2003:


Medical malpractice statistics for the U.S.A. 2003:

Medical malpractice statistics for the U.S.A. 2003:


The following case history will serve to illustrate several important legal considerations for office-based private dental practitioners to remember when faced with potential legal liability.




CASE PRESENTATION


A 34-year-old married father in relatively good health presented for an initial screening examination. The patient’s chief complaint was of a chronic toothache associated with tooth number 20. Historically, the patient related that he had seen another dentist for the complaint and had been told that the best option was to remove the tooth because that was the “least expensive way to go.” The patient currently insisted that he preferred to save the tooth. Clinically, no. 20 was moderately broken down, but restorable. Radiographically, a 2–3mm periapical radiolucency was evident. There were no signs of inflammation or evidence of an acute infection during this examination.


The practitioner opined that indeed the previous dentist was in error and that no. 20 could likely be salvaged via endodontic therapy and a full-coverage restoration.


When the patient was presented with the proposed treatment plan and associated fees, he shared that he couldn’t afford the treatment at that time but would soon be in touch. The patient, also an artist, offered to exchange services. The screening appointment ended with an admonition to address the pathology in a timely manner. The patient paid one-half the examination fee and committed to submit the balance within two weeks.


The patient did not follow up with an appointment for treatment or by remitting the balance of the examination fee and was subsequently turned over to a collection service by front office staff three months after the office examination. Six months after the screening appointment, the dentist’s staff received a request from the patient’s spouse for the patient’s records. The front office staff promptly forwarded the patient’s records without advising the defendant dentist of the request. At nine months after the screening appointment, the dentist was served with legal papers alleging dental malpractice including misdiagnosis, improper treatment planning, improper treatment, and abandonment, all resulting in significant morbidity.


At this point in time the dentist notified his carrier about the claim.

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Mar 25, 2017 | Posted by in GENERAL & FAMILY MEDICINE | Comments Off on Dentistry

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access