ABSTRACT
AIM: To undertake a review of cases from one dental advisory practice in England over a period of 5.5 years to provide a profile of the type of work undertaken. DESIGN AND SETTING: Compensation claims for dental negligence seen at one dental advisory practice between 1991 and 1996. METHODS: 437 claims were reviewed for: the nature of the complaint; defendant details; plaintiff details; method of funding; duration and outcome of claim. Comparisons were made with previously published data. The relationship between method of funding of a claim and the likelihood of the claim being successful was investigated. RESULTS: 28% of complaints concerned oral surgery and 24%, restorative procedures. In 72% of cases, the compensation claim was made directly against the dentist who had provided treatment for the patient. The majority of claims were gender and age biased; females (63%) and younger people (18-45 years of age) (68%) were more likely to bring actions for dental negligence. Only 3% involved elderly patients (> or = 60 years old). Claims supported by the government legal aid scheme were more likely to be withdrawn or rejected than those privately funded. Nearly all cases were completed in under one year (81%). CONCLUSIONS: Results are similar to previously published studies. A large proportion of claims concerned restorative or oral surgery procedures carried out in general or community practice.
