RESUMO
Background and Aim: The law of the land assumes that a dentist will always use credible skill, care, and caution in the care of patients. Failing to do something that one is supposed to do (act of omission) or doing something that one is not supposed to do (act of commission) falls under the purview of medical jurisprudence. Each patient is legally entitled to get quality medical care from a physician; failure to such trust is an actionable offense and grievances can be challenged in consumer redressal forums. This analytical study was aimed to study the reasons for dental negligence cases that sought judicial assistance in consumer courts in terms of monetary benefits and also to study the delay in settlements. Materials and Methods: Archival data of final court-pronounced judgment cases on dental negligence between 2018 and 2022 (i.e., 5 years) were gathered from customer forum websites (https://confonet.nic.in, http://indiankanoon.org/doc, and www.casemine.com). A total of 56 proven dental allegation cases were retrieved. In each verdict case, the allegation against dentist by the plaintiff was recorded, and the response to the complaint by the defendant was studied and analyzed. The year of filing the case and date of judgment, basis of compensation awarded, delay in judgment and role of expert evidence appointed by the court assessed. Results: Misdemeanor by serious negligence: 3, slight negligence: 8, negligent injuries: 35, felony of injuries by serious negligence: 10. Conclusion: Because dentistry involves making decisions in unclear scenarios that affect patient care, there is an inherent danger of malpractice litigation. Awareness of medico-legal issues and professional indemnity insurance coverage for the dentist to safeguard himself from negligence, continuous medico-legal training and documentation of records, and adherence to clinical standards for procedures should be emphasized as prior motives to enhance the standard of care, and a basic awareness of how Indian courts resolve disputes would help dentists plan their professional indemnity insurance and operate their profession properly.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Oral Lichen Planus (OLP) is considered to be associated with numerous systemic conditions one of which includes Chronic Liver Disease (CLD). Hepatitis virus B and C (HBV and HCV) have known to be important causative agents of CLD and can be prevalent in asymptomatic carriers that can make them difficult to identify. Off late, the association of viral hepatitis with OLP has been a subject of controversy due to conflicting reports. Indian studies on this regard are sparse to evaluate the same. Association between the hepatitis virus and OLP, if present and established, can be of great help to format a protocol for identifying carrier states of viral hepatitis due to HBV and HCV. METHODOLOGY: Forty five cases of clinically and histologically confirmed OLP were subjected to a serological screening of hepatitis B and C viruses by detection of hepatitis B surface antigen and anti-hepatitis C virus antibodies. RESULTS: None of OLP cases were seropositive for the hepatitis viruses. CONCLUSION: We could not demonstrate any association between OLP and viral hepatitis. This could be attributed to lower prevalence of hepatitis viruses compared to the countries hyper endemic for these viruses or genotypic variation of the viruses or other etiological factors contributing for the present group of patients.