The issue of The GDC’s interest in its registrant’s lives outside of the surgery, and away from patient interactions is not new. A recent Subject Access Request (SAR) has shown that the GDC continue to take an interest in issues that have little if anything to do with protecting the public or maintaining confidence in the profession.
No comments
The changing experiences of dental professionals have been bought into sharp focus by a recent survey from one of the largest indemnifiers. A new Dental Protection survey of over 1,300 UK dental professionals, revealed that more than half (57%) had experienced or witnessed verbal or physical abuse from patients, or their relatives, in the past 12 months.
Read more: Increased Abuse as Public Frustration with Access Boils Over
The NHS Dental Statistics for England 2022-23 have just been published and out of the myriad of numbers, percentages and trends, one statistic will see ministers cling to it like Titanic passengers to a life raft: the number of courses of treatment delivered over the past year is up by almost a quarter at 23.2 %.
Read more: NHS Dental Statistics: Dentist Numbers Down But Treatments Delivered Are Up
With our unique NHS system and accident prone government, it is often assumed that health related matters are worse in the UK than elsewhere, and that we will languish at the bottom of league tables, complete with a particularly unhappy workforce.
With dental news in the UK press often about NHS access and workforce, the profession has, so far at least, been spared patients commenting on the latest dentists behaving (very) badly stories. Spare a thought then, for our North American colleagues.
GDPUK has reported from time to time on fake dentists, most recently the case of a one man band caught operating from a hotel room in the USA. But this pales into insignificance with the scale of the problems now being reported much closer to UK borders.
If you are a member of the dental profession, dental student or from the allied trades, please register to join us.
| It's FREE to join! Click here |
 |
This review of premolar extraction v non-extraction orthodontic treatment included 30 studies. Of these studies were 29 were retrospective and all 30 studies were considered to be at high risk of bias. The certainty of evidence is vey low so additional high quality research is required.
The post Extraction or non-extraction treatment and orthodontic outcomes appeared first on National Elf Service.
This review of coronectomy versus extraction of third molars in patients at increased risk of inferior alveolar nerve (IAN) injuries included 42 observational studies. The findings indicate lower a reduction in the odds of IAN sensory loss in favour of coronectomy and an increase in the odds of surgical reintervention.
The post Coronectomy for lower third molar surgery appeared first on National Elf Service.
This review comparing the incidence of peri-implant disease with cement- and screw-retained prostheses included 6 RCTs. The findings suggest no difference in level of peri-implant disease with cement- or screw retained prosthesis. However, the studies are small none of them are at low risk of bias. Consequently the findings should be interpreted cautiously.
The post Cement-or screw-retained implant-supported prostheses and peri-implant disease appeared first on National Elf Service.