Source · SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman)

A Dental Practice in the Greater Glasgow and Clyde NHS Board area

SPSO (Scottish Public Services Ombudsman) Upheld Reference 201102613 Sector Health Category clinical treatment; diagnosis Decided 01 June 2012

Full decision

Summary

Mr C complained that his 14-year-old son (Master A) had six baby teeth extracted by his dentist. At the time the family were told that this was necessary to allow room for his adult teeth to come through. Master A also had an adult molar removed, again to allow space for the rest of his adult teeth to come through. Mr C has now learned that his son has a congenital problem (a condition present at birth) that means he has no further adult teeth to come through. Mr C said that the dentist was wrong to have extracted the teeth when there was no clinical need to do so.

We upheld Mr C's complaints. We found that overall there was a lack of documentation to show what the dentist discussed with him. Although there was no evidence about whether it was clinically appropriate to have extracted Master A's baby teeth, we found that the dentist should have sought specialist orthodontic advice before carrying out the procedure. We found that the adult tooth which was extracted had been heavily filled. However, while it may have been appropriate for the dentist to have extracted it, there was no evidence that a treatment plan had been carried out or that informed consent had been obtained.

Recommendations

We recommended that the practice: • apologise for the failure to obtain an orthodontic opinion prior to the extraction of Master A's baby teeth and for failing to explain his reasons for doing so; and • apologise for the failure to produce a treatment plan for the extraction and for not obtaining informed consent for the extraction.

Related reading

View Decision Report 201102613 as a PDF (22.33 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018

View original on SPSO (Scottish Publ… website

Other decisions involving A Dental Practice in the Greater Glasgo…

Reference Date Summary Outcome
202408340 01 May 2025 C complained about being de-registered from their dental practice. C also complained that the practice failed to handle their complaint … Upheld
201608073 01 Aug 2017 Mrs C complained to us on behalf of her husband (Mr A) about dental treatment he had received from the … Not Upheld
201407051 01 May 2016 Mr C saw a dentist at the practice. Arrangements were made for future treatment and Mr C attended a further … Not Upheld
201505349 01 May 2016 Mr C complained about his dentist's charging policy. However, the complaint was resolved when the dental practice offered to change … Resolved / Early Resolution
201407829 01 Dec 2015 Ms C was charged by her dental practice for a missed appointment. Ms C felt this was unreasonable in the … Partly Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation