Wedding teeth

A dental practitioner contacted The DDU about an adverse dental reference officer's report. This report was about an inappropriate treatment plan involving the maintenance of anterior teeth and the provision of a partial denture rather than extractions, for a patient with severe chronic periodontitis and extensive caries affecting numerous teeth.

The patient and her fiancée had put the dentist under considerable pressure to save her upper front teeth in particular. The main reason for this was that they were shortly to be married and the patient specifically requested that these teeth were "patched up" for the wedding.

There was no doubt that if the dentist suggested that the teeth were removed, the patient would not have returned to the surgery and would have sought advice elsewhere. The dentist felt that it would be in the patient's best short-term interests to try to save the teeth. Unfortunately, the DRO did not share this view. The dentist contacted the DDU and we studied the patient's dental records and radiographs and advised her on an appropriate response to the Dental Practice Board. This explained the mitigating circumstances.

The dentist was delighted when the Dental Practice Board accepted her explanation. Had they not done so, there would have been a risk of disciplinary action against her.

This case shows how important it is not to be influenced by patients' particular requests for treatment which is, in the opinion of the dentist, not appropriate nor in line with current teaching and practice. It also demonstrates the importance of contacting the DDU if you receive an adverse DRO report, so that we can advise on an appropriate response.



This page was correct at publication on 01/10/2002. Any guidance is intended as general guidance for members only. If you are a member and need specific advice relating to your own circumstances, please contact one of our advisers.

Comments

Login to comment

Be the first to comment