Select location
Membership information
0800 561 9000
Dentolegal advice
0800 561 1010
Menu
Refine my search

Acknowledging a ‘life event’

Post date: 14/11/2016 | Time to read article: 2 mins

The information within this article was correct at the time of publishing. Last updated 14/11/2018

What may seem a run-of-the-mill appointment for the dentist can often be a major event for the patient. Keeping detailed records of discussions and warnings is essential...

A classic example of a failure to communicate often arises over the extraction of third molars. Patients, judges in civil claims and dental councils often use the argument that to attend the dentist for the removal of a third molar is a significant ‘life event’ for a patient. The patient will often be able to recall every detail including explanations (or lack of them) given by a dentist as well as details of the dentist’s mood or attitude.

To the dentist, the patient is just one of many whose third molars are being removed. In order to ensure the dentist can later discuss the details of the care of a particular patient, it is important that the record documents the history of any symptoms, the clinical findings along with any investigations and tests that were performed.

The notes should demonstrate the justification for the treatment including the choices given to the patient In addition a clear note should be made of the  warnings about the risks and consequences of the procedure and the post-operative instructions given. A detailed note of the procedure and any difficulties encountered in the procedure should also be kept, together with the action taken.

Memory is not enough

A patient attended for an extraction under sedation. There was a discussion about which tooth to remove, but the patient’s abiding memory was that no discussion had taken place about the risks and post-operative consequences and that no warnings had been given about the likelihood of such a significant outcome. Nothing was written in the records about the consent process for the surgical procedure. The dentist suggested that it was his normal practice to warn about the risk of nerve damage but he could not recall the particular patient or prove that he warned them of the possible consequences. 

The patient suffered permanent nerve damage and subsequently sued both for a failure to warn and the avoidable damage caused to the nerve.

Learning point:

Good communication must go hand in hand with good record keeping.

These case studies are based on real events and provided here as guidance. They do not constitute legal advice but are published to help members better understand how they might deal with certain situations. This is just one of the many benefits dental members enjoy as part of their subscription. 
For more detailed advice on any issues, contact us

Share this article

Share
Load more reviews
Rating

You've already submitted a review for this item

|
New site feature tour

Introducing an improved
online experience

You'll notice a few things have changed on our website. After asking our members what they want in an online platform, we've made it easier to access our membership benefits and created a more personalised user experience.

Why not take our quick 60-second tour? We'll show you how it all works and it should only take a minute.

Take the tour Continue to site

Dentolegal advice
0800 561 1010
Membership information
0800 561 9000

Key contact details

Should you need to contact us, our phone numbers are always visible.

Personalise your search

We'll save your profession in the "I am a..." dropdown filter for next time.

Tour completed

Now you've seen all of the updated features, it's time for you to try them out.

Continue to site
Take again