HCLP / GDC STANDARDS / SPECIAL CARE - STATION 5 Flashcards
to prove that someone is negligent, it involves proving what three things?
- duty of care
- causation of harm
- breach of duty
what three things need to occur for their to be proof of negligence
- duty of care
- causation of harm
- breach of duty
of the three things needed to prove negligence, which is the easiest?
duty of care
why is duty of care the easiest to prove when dealing with negligence?
duty of care for dentist only occurs in the practice, outside of the practice it becomes someone else’s responsibility.
the second part of negligence is?
1st - duty of care
2nd - breach of duty
for someone to have breached their duty of care, according to hunter vs hanley (1955) Lord Clyde
what three things need to be proved
- it must be proved that there is a usual and normal practice for any procedure
- it must be proved that the defender has not adopted that practice
e.g patient has inhaled a endo file, and a rubber dam has not been used.
- it must be established that the course the defender adopted is one which no professional person of ordinary skill would have taken if he had been acting with ordinary care
e.g. your not negligence for reaching a gold standard, your negligence for not reaching the minimally accepted standard.
to establish negligence you will be judged against the ordinary general dental practioner acting with ordinary care
if you are a specialist in restorative dentistry and you have claim against you for negligence will you be judged against the ordinary general practioner to establish negligence?
no you will be judged against a specialist in restorative dentistry acting with ordinary care.
what is the 3rd part of negligence
1st part - duty of care
2nd part - breach of duty
3rd part - causation of harm
for causation what must the patient/pursuer show
the pursuer must be able to show that the negligence of the medical professional caused, or materially contributed to the bad outcome
in a scenario where a dentist has breached their duty of care, but their was no causation of harm. does the patient have grounds for compensation through negligence?
no
the burden of proof is with who
the patient/pursuer
not on the dentists/defender
there are two types of things on law
criminal standard - beyond the reasonable doubt
civil standard - on the balance of probabilities
the court have to be satisfied with someone who is negligent on the balance probabilities
if a defender has opted poor practice due to mitigations what must the defender have done to protect himself
must have detailed notes of any mitigations
e.g.
cannot reach the full length of the apex in a root canal treatment due to a stop/ledge
this needs to be noted down and referral needs to be made
what is complaint
any expression of dissatisfaction by a patient (or their representative) about a dental service or treatment, whether justified or not
what is a claim for compensation
a claim for something, typically money, in recognition of loss, suffering, or injury
complaints can result in a claim for compensation, but not all complaints will
what GDC standards must you adhere to when dealing with claims for compensation?
1.8 - have appropriate arrangements in place for patients to seek compensation if they suffer harm
1.8.1 - you must have appropriate insurance or indemnity in place to make sure your patients can claim any compensation to which they may be entitled
1.8.2 - you should ensure that you keep to the terms and conditions of your insurance or indemnity and contact the provider as soon as possible when a claim is made.
claims for compensation
poor records =
no records =
poor records = poor defence
no records = no defence
which areas of dentistry has shown a growth in claims for compensation
- undiagnosed/untreated perio disease
- implants and associated procedures
- adult orthodontics particularly short term orthodontics
- consent issues across all treatment types