Can a dentist ethically remove serviceable amalgam restorations?

Article Abstract:

A dentist can ethically remove fillings at the request of patients who believe that removing them may improve their health although there is no scientific evidence that supports this belief. The American Dental Association deems it unethical for dentists to recommend removing fillings solely to treat medical conditions. Neither is the dentist obligated to perform this treatment at the request of a patient or the patient's physician. However, the dentist may choose to do so provided the dentist takes special care obtaining informed consent. The informed consent process should include telling the patient that no evidence supports the practice of removing fillings as a therapy for disease and that no health benefits are promised as a result. It should also include a review of the costs and risks of tooth damage during the removal and the risks, benefits, and costs of replacement materials. The informed consent process and the patient's consent should be documented in writing.

Health aspects, Dental amalgams, Dental care, Oral hygiene

---

Does the dentist have an ethical duty to report child abuse?

Article Abstract:

Dentists should educate themselves about the signs of child abuse and should feel obligated to report any children suspected of being abused. The law in all 50 states requires that health professionals report any suspected child abuse. State laws also protect the reporters from criminal liability if child abuse has not occurred. The American Dental Association has added a statement to its code of ethics requiring dentists to report suspected child abuse. Many symptoms of child abuse involve trauma to the head and should be recognized by dentists. However, it appears that dentists file only 1% of child abuse reports. Protecting children should come before the personal inconvenience of becoming involved in the criminal justice system.

Diagnosis, Child abuse, Dentist and patient, Dentist-patient relations

---

Challenging a negative report: neither a physician nor a dentist can sue to stop a negative report to the National Practitioner Data Bank before the report is filed

Article Abstract:

Dentists and doctors cannot prevent a negative report about them from being filed with the National Practitioner Data Bank. This was the conclusion of a federal district court in the case of a doctor who was under investigation for alleged improprieties committed while working at the Medical College of Ohio. The medical school began its investigation four months after the doctor had resigned his position. He attempted unsuccessfully to prevent the medical school's report from being filed with the National Practitioner Data Bank.

Investigations, Physicians, Medical professions, Information services, Malpractice

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Primary care physician supply and the medically underserved: a status report and recommendations. The National Practitioner Data Bank: report from the first year
• Abstracts: Comparison of clinical, radionuclide, and radiographic features of osteoarthritis of the hands. Osteophytes in the osteoarthritic hand: their incidence, size, distribution, and progression
• Abstracts: Maternal serum alpha2-macroglobulin and fetal growth retardation. part 2 Prepregnancy weight and pregnancy outcome
• Abstracts: Risk factors for cordocentesis and fetal intravascular transfusion. A five-year statewide experience with congenital diaphragmatic hernia
• Abstracts: Issues in treatment. Targeting health advocacy efforts toward the older population. Cancer in the aged: an epidemiologic perspective on treatment issues

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.