Ethics Flashcards
Definition of negligence (2)
Omission to do something which a reasonable practitioner would do or doing something which a reasonable practitioner would not do
How long after treatment can claims be prosecuted?
3 years
How long should records be kept (2)
As long as possible (indefinitely), but a minimum of 11 years, or if they are a child’s records, until that child is 25 years old
How is clinical negligence established? (4)
When a dentist fails to meet the standards as follows: there is a usual and normal practice; the dentist did not adopt it; the course the dentist adopted is one which no reasonable practitioner would have taken. Harm that results from dental treatment is negligent if the dentist’s practice fails to meet the standard of ordinary care
A clinical negligence claim is upheld if (4)
The dentist owed a duty of care (usually automatic).
The duty was breached (standard of care wasn’t met).
That breach caused/materially contributed to damage (causation).
This damage was reasonably foreseeable and had negative consequences and effects
Record-keeping must be (4)
Accurate, detailed, up-to-date and an ordinary practitioner must be able to understand them
Consent must be (6)
Valid With capacity Informed Voluntary Not coerced Not manipulated
Capacity involves the ability to:(5)
Act (decide) Make a reasoned decision Communicate a decision Understand a decision Retain the memory of a decision
Informed consent requires (3)
Sufficient information to be communicated
Specific questions to be answered honestly
Information documented
Definition of material risks
Risks/information that a reasonable person would be likely to attach significance to when warned of them
Modes of obtaining consent (2)
Implied (oral/verbal for minor procedures)
Explicit (written - for GA)
Types of Power of Attorney (4)
Welfare (care/needs of adult)
Continuing (financial/property)
Intervention order (one-off decision when no PoA)
Guardship order (continuous management of welfare/financial affairs when no PoA)
Questions to ask when considering consent (2)
Can I justify this?
Could I be criticised for this?
Risk communication should reflect (3)
Likelihood (probability)
Severity
Significance (material risk) to the individual