Advertisement

Summary

Endodontic procedures are both challenging and technically demanding resulting in treatments that may have fallen short of acceptable guidelines. Occasionally the dentist may be open to litigation on the basis of clinical negligence. Failure to communicate with patients about the procedure and not obtaining consent for treatment is a key area of complaint, as is inadequate record keeping. When treatment is undertaken within the framework of accepted guidelines, it would be very difficult for a patient to open a claim for clinical negligence should a failure occur.

Keywords

Oral Health Endodontic Treatment Sympathetic Ophthalmia Valid Consent Clinical Risk Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Lim HC, Tan CB, Goh LG, Ling SL. Why do patients complain? A primary health care study. Singapore Med J. 1998;39(9):390–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ware JE, Davies-Avery A, Stewart AL. The measurement and meaning of patient satisfaction: a review of the literature. Santa Monica: Rand Corp; 1977.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rattan R, Tiernan J. Risk management in general dental practice. London: Quintessence Publishing; 2004.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    DiMatteo MR, Hays RD, Prince LM. Relationship of physicians’ nonverbal communication skill to patient satisfaction, appointment noncompliance, and physician workload. Health Psychol. 1986;5(6):581.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    D’Cruz L. Risk management in clinical practice. Part 1. Introduction. Br Dent J. 2010;209(2):19–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Collier A. The management of risk part 1: why complaints happen and how to prevent them. Dent Update. 2014;41:168–73.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dym H, Ogle OE. Risk management techniques for the general dentist. Handbook of dental practice. Dent Clin North Am. 2008;52:3.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Collier A. The management of risk part 2: good consent and communication. Dent Update. 2014;41:236–41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Collier A. The management of risk part 3: recording your way out of trouble. Dent Update. 2014;41:338–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D’Cruz L. Off the record. Dent Update. 2006;33:390–400.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edelstein L. The Hippocratic oath: text, translation and interpretation, Bulletin of history of medicine. Supplement 1. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1945.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of biomedical ethics. 4th ed. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Council GD. Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for dental care professionals. London: General Dental Council; 2008.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dental Board of Australia. Communique March 2014. http://www.ada.org.au/dentalboardofaustralia.aspx
  15. 15.
    Nash DA. Ethics in dentistry: review and critique of Principles of Ethics and Code of Professional Conduct. J Am Dent Assoc. 1984;109(4):597–603.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee (1957) I WLR 582Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sidaway v Board of Governers of Bethlem Royal and the Maudsley Hospital (1985) 2 WLR 480Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority (1997) 39 BMLR 1: (1998) I Lloyds Rep Med 26Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 67 AWR 47Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kirby M. Patients’ rights – why the Australian courts have rejected “Bolam”. J Med Ethics. 1995;21:5–8.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schloenforff v Society of New York Hospital 211 NY 124; 105 NE 92, 93 (1914) (NYCA)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Canterbury v Spence 464 F 2d (1972) (USCA)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    King JS, Moulton B. Rethinking informed consent: the case for shared medical decision-making. Am J Law Med. 2006;32:429–501.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech AHA (1985) 3 All ER 402–437Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Children’s’ Act 1998 and 2004Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mental Health Act 1983 (Amended 1995 and 2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    F v West Berkshire Health Authority (1990) HLGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mental Capacity Act 2005Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    The Medical Defence Union Ltd. Confidentiality. London; MDU 1997Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nehammer C, Chong BS, Rattan R. Endodontics. Clin Risk. 2004;10:45–8.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Webber J. Risk management in clinical practice. Part 4. Endodontics. Br Dent J. 2010;209(4):161–70.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bobby Patel
    • 1
  1. 1.CanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations