Summary
Ms C, who works for a voluntary agency, complained on behalf of Mr A that the care and treatment he received was inadequate and that his subsequent complaint had been poorly handled. Mr A had suffered repeated problems with dental bridgework failing. Ms C said he had been seen by a number of different dentists, causing problems with continuity of care. Mr A also believed that a tooth had been prepared for a crown inappropriately and that he had had an unnecessary extraction, and that he had unreasonably been refused bridgework treatment.
We took independent dental advice, which stated that Mr A had received a comprehensive examination. It was not practical to fit a bridge because of decay in the teeth it would have to be attached to. It would also not have been appropriate to attempt any other restorative work until Mr A's gum disease issues were dealt with. The advice noted that Mr A had been insistent that a bridge be fitted, but the dentist had correctly refused on the basis that this would be inappropriate and would worsen the condition of his teeth.
We found that Mr A's care and treatment was reasonable in the circumstances. His complaint had been thoroughly investigated and a response provided within a reasonable timescale.
Related reading
View Decision Report 201508583 as a PDF (11.24 KB) Updated: March 13, 2018