Should you fix another dentist’s treatment?

Xanthoula Maitou, Dentolegal Consultant at Dental Protection, looks at a case where a patient asks a dentist to reverse treatment provided by another dentist.

______

Case summary 

Mr X had been a patient at Dr Z’s NHS practice for many years. He attended regularly, maintained good oral health, and there had always been a positive, trusting relationship. 

Some years earlier, Mr X had expressed interest in improving the appearance of his upper lateral incisors. At the time, Dr Z discussed options including porcelain veneers, but Mr X chose not to proceed due to cost. 

When Mr X returned following the COVID-19 period, the situation had changed. He had undergone private treatment elsewhere and now presented with veneers on his upper anterior teeth. Although clinically acceptable, he was unhappy with their appearance and asked Dr Z if they could be replaced. 

Professional dilemma 

This presented a subtle but important challenge. 

On a clinical level, the situation was straightforward as the veneers were sound, and there was no pathology. The request for replacement was purely aesthetic, meaning it would not be appropriate within an NHS course of treatment. 

However, the situation felt more complex on a personal level. As a long-standing patient, there was an element of disappointment that Mr X had chosen to seek treatment elsewhere, particularly when similar care had previously been offered. There was also some frustration around the expectation that replacement might be provided on the NHS. 

Recognising these feelings was important. They had the potential to influence communication and decision making if not managed carefully. 

Managing the situation 

Dr Z approached the discussion by focusing on clear, honest communication. He explained the clinical findings, clarified the distinction between NHS and private treatment, and outlined the available options. 

Importantly, he also suggested that Mr X may wish to return to the original dentist who carried out the work, as they would be best placed to address his concerns. 

Although this was a reasonable and appropriate suggestion, Dr Z later reflected on whether he had handled the situation as well as he could, prompting him to seek advice from Dental Protection. 

Dental Protection’s advice 

The advice he received reinforced the importance of maintaining objectivity. While it is natural to feel a sense of loyalty or disappointment in situations like this, professional judgement should remain grounded in clinical need and patient-centred care. 

This case also highlighted how easily expectations around NHS provision can become blurred, particularly when patients move between private and NHS care. Taking time to explain these boundaries clearly and early can help prevent misunderstandings. 

Another key reflection was the importance of professional courtesy. Avoiding criticism of another clinician’s work, even when a patient is dissatisfied, helps maintain trust and professionalism within the wider dental community.

Outcome and insight 

When Mr X made contact again, the conversation was more measured and constructive. He ultimately chose to return to the original dentist to address his concerns and remained a patient at the practice. 

Looking back, the situation had a positive outcome, not because the clinical problem was complex, but because it was handled with care, clarity, and professionalism. 

Key reflections