Proving clinical negligence

For a claim for clinical negligence to be successful, the patient (claimant) must prove there was some failure by the dental professional...

For a claim for clinical negligence to be successful, the claimant must prove there was some failure by the dental professional, and that failure caused the injuries the patient is complaining about.

The claimant must prove it was more likely than not that:

  1. the defendant dental professional owed them a duty of care
  2. there was a breach of duty
  3. avoidable harm followed as a result.

The patient must prove breach of duty of care AND causation (that the breach of duty caused the injury or loss in question) for a claim to succeed.

Breach of duty and causation do not always go hand in hand. For example:

  • a patient could be harmed without the dental professional having been negligent - such as 'dry socket' following an extraction
  • a dental professional can be in breach of duty without any harm to the patient - such as in the failure to diagnose very early caries, which does not progress.

Clinical management and the Bolam test

  • Just because something has gone wrong or does not meet the patient's expectations, it doesn't mean the dental professional has been negligent.
  • The patient must provide evidence that a dental professional's clinical management or performance has fallen below a reasonable standard.

In the event of a claim, the clinical management of a patient is assessed by one of our dento-legal advisers and/or an independent dental expert against the Bolam standard. For dentists, the Bolam standard is that of 'a responsible body of dentists' practising in the same field, though this does not have to be the standard of the majority. For dental hygienists, it will be 'a responsible body of dental hygienists', and so on.

In the highly unlikely event that the claim went to court, the judge may decide not to accept an expert's evidence if it does not stand up to close inspection. It is up to a judge to decide if the standard of care is reasonable.

Seek help from the DDU

Unfortunately, things can and do go wrong and in practice, but we appreciate that is no consolation if you have just received a solicitor's letter, full of allegations of negligence and consequences for their client. Of course, the allegations may be unfounded or incorrect and not all claims will proceed.

Seeking our professional help is essential at the first sign of a claim so we can provide you with the guidance and support you need at this difficult time.

This page was correct at publication on 04/05/2020. 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.

You may also be interested in

Case study

Fractured tuberosity during extraction

A patient in her late 50s attended her dentist complaining of pain from a back tooth.

Read more
Case study

Retained root fragment following extraction

A DDU member's clinical notes were a vital part of a successful defence of a claim brought against them by a patient who was left with a root fragment in their distal socket following a root canal and extraction.

Read more
Case study

Failure to diagnose and treat periodontal disease

Two practice hygienists contacted the DDU for assistance with a claim alleging a failure to diagnose and treat periodontal disease, brought against them by a patient they had been seeing at their practice for over ten years.

Read more

Comments

Login to comment

Be the first to comment