Section 7Dental Dilemmas
Keeping a practitioner on the DDU advice
Dental Performers List
A general dental practitioner had a routine dental A DDU dento-legal adviser met with the dentist to
reference officer (DRO) visit, when patients were discuss how to approach the panel hearing and a plan
examined and record cards reviewed. The DRO’s was developed to demonstrate how he had addressed
report identified concerns with the dentist’s note the PCT’s concerns. For example, the dentist agreed to an
keeping, including insufficient detail justifying the audit of his record-keeping after three months. The
taking of radiographs and inadequate reporting of dentist also sought a meeting with the PCT’s dental
the results. There were no concerns raised about adviser to address the treatment planning issues. In
the actual quality of treatment on the patients addition, it was proposed that the dentist would enrol in
examined. the BDA good practice scheme to enhance his clinical
Following this report, the NHS Business Services Authority
governance, and contact the deanery for help in drawing
(NHSBSA) asked for a number of other record cards to
up a personal development plan.
be examined in detail. These records apparently raised Attending the panel hearing to support and represent
additional concerns about incomplete courses of the dentist, the DDU dento-legal advisor explained that
treatment and unusual treatment planning. the dentist had taken the opportunity to review his
The PCT’s decision making group decided that there
practice in the light of the DRO report and wanted to
should be an in-depth investigation and that the
work with the PCT to address any issues and avoid the
practitioner should be suspended from the dental
need for suspension. The adviser then set out the
performers list in the meantime. The dentist was given
dentist’s proposals to achieve this.
seven day’s notice of a suspension hearing by his PCT and At the end of the hearing, the dentist and dento-legal
promptly contacted the DDU for help. Having received adviser were informed that the panel had accepted the
the initial DRO report, the practitioner had immediately proposals and the dentist would not be suspended while
started to make more detailed records, particularly the concerns were addressed. The dentist’s insight into
concerning the clinical need for radiographs, and he was his own shortcomings and his willingness to address
concerned that he might be suspended without the these in a positive, constructive manner were noted to be
opportunity to show he had addressed the concerns important factors taken into account by the panel when
about his record keeping. However, he explained that he considering the action it should take.
was unaware of the PCT’s other concerns until he
received notice of the suspension hearing.
“…the dentist had taken the
opportunity to review his practice
in the light of the DRO report…”
35
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74