MALPRACTICE MALADIES
I thought a review of some of the most recent malpractice trial judgments would be interesting reading this month
and they always keep us on our toes. Some of these cases include:
$125,000 for taste and feeling. The severing of the lingual or inferior alveolar nerve during the extraction of a third
molar represents a relatively common legal scenario. An Orange County dentist is the most recent reported trial
case for this incident. A general dentist decided not to refer his patient to an oral surgeon for the removal of 3rds
and attempted the procedure himself. The teeth came out, but so did a lot of jaw bone and the nerve was either
severed or permanently damaged. Our legal system in California has basically determined such cases are worth in
the low one hundred thousands. I don’t think I’d give up my taste and feeling for that much!
A $100,000 verdict was handed down under a ‘spoilation of evidence’ theory in the case of a Los Angeles dentist
that altered and falsified original treating records in the case of an implant/crown patient. The dentist, whose name
remained confidential, placed multiple cantilever bridges in which he admitted that they might not have been the
‘best’ treatment decision, did not treat the patient’s periodontal condition, left considerable cement on the teeth,
and had grossly open margins. One of the problems was that the dentist failed to alter all the records. His
appointment book and lab slips told the true story, and they conflicted with the patient record. Note that
malpractice insurance does not normally cover this type of intentional fraud and here the doctor further irritated
the court when he refused to present his personal financial information without being compelled to do so. Will he
ever learn?
Here’s the case of a dentist who seemed to do everything right but still got sued. Dr. Dewhirst’s patient, Gigi, came
to the office with a toothache. Gigi had been a patient of the Dewhirst’s Partnership dental office for many years. It
was determined by an associate dentist that Gigi needed a root canal on tooth #5 to solve her problem. The
dentist diligently placed a rubber dam, rubber dam napkin and clip. The access opening was prepared, the canal
was negotiated, and sodium hypo chlorite was used
as irrigation. High volume suction aspirated the solution. However, when Gigi went home, she claimed she suffered
from a severe chemical burn in her mouth and on her chin as a result of the bleach. She stated in trial that she
had to wear a face mask for a year until the scars healed and that she now suffers permanently from agoraphobia
from the rubber dam. Gigi sued for $99,500. Fortunately for the treating dentist, a dermatologist Gigi saw 4 days
after the incident could not detect any evidence of
burn or tissue damage, nor did her family physician. The dentist won, but lost a lot of time and undoubtedly a lot of
sleep.
Sometimes there is nothing you can do to prevent getting sued. But usually keeping excellent records,
communicating continually with your patients, and following accepted treatment modalities will keep you from the
witness stand.
© Bette Robin, DDS, JD 12/98
and they always keep us on our toes. Some of these cases include:
$125,000 for taste and feeling. The severing of the lingual or inferior alveolar nerve during the extraction of a third
molar represents a relatively common legal scenario. An Orange County dentist is the most recent reported trial
case for this incident. A general dentist decided not to refer his patient to an oral surgeon for the removal of 3rds
and attempted the procedure himself. The teeth came out, but so did a lot of jaw bone and the nerve was either
severed or permanently damaged. Our legal system in California has basically determined such cases are worth in
the low one hundred thousands. I don’t think I’d give up my taste and feeling for that much!
A $100,000 verdict was handed down under a ‘spoilation of evidence’ theory in the case of a Los Angeles dentist
that altered and falsified original treating records in the case of an implant/crown patient. The dentist, whose name
remained confidential, placed multiple cantilever bridges in which he admitted that they might not have been the
‘best’ treatment decision, did not treat the patient’s periodontal condition, left considerable cement on the teeth,
and had grossly open margins. One of the problems was that the dentist failed to alter all the records. His
appointment book and lab slips told the true story, and they conflicted with the patient record. Note that
malpractice insurance does not normally cover this type of intentional fraud and here the doctor further irritated
the court when he refused to present his personal financial information without being compelled to do so. Will he
ever learn?
Here’s the case of a dentist who seemed to do everything right but still got sued. Dr. Dewhirst’s patient, Gigi, came
to the office with a toothache. Gigi had been a patient of the Dewhirst’s Partnership dental office for many years. It
was determined by an associate dentist that Gigi needed a root canal on tooth #5 to solve her problem. The
dentist diligently placed a rubber dam, rubber dam napkin and clip. The access opening was prepared, the canal
was negotiated, and sodium hypo chlorite was used
as irrigation. High volume suction aspirated the solution. However, when Gigi went home, she claimed she suffered
from a severe chemical burn in her mouth and on her chin as a result of the bleach. She stated in trial that she
had to wear a face mask for a year until the scars healed and that she now suffers permanently from agoraphobia
from the rubber dam. Gigi sued for $99,500. Fortunately for the treating dentist, a dermatologist Gigi saw 4 days
after the incident could not detect any evidence of
burn or tissue damage, nor did her family physician. The dentist won, but lost a lot of time and undoubtedly a lot of
sleep.
Sometimes there is nothing you can do to prevent getting sued. But usually keeping excellent records,
communicating continually with your patients, and following accepted treatment modalities will keep you from the
witness stand.
© Bette Robin, DDS, JD 12/98
| Bette Robin 1-877-DrRobin Dentist, Attorney, Real Estate Broker 1-877-377-6246 |
 | |  | |  | |  | |  |
DrRobin@BetteRobin.com
17482 Irvine Blvd., Ste. E
Tustin, CA 92780
Tustin, CA 92780
Call:
Fax:
Fax:
877 DrRobin
714-421-4407
714-398-8808
714-421-4407
714-398-8808
Select Practice Services, Inc.