A Study Into Malpractices in the Dental Practice in the Town Of Plovdiv – Bulgaria Over A 5-Year Period

N. Musurlieva, M. Stoykova, S. Novakova
{"title":"A Study Into Malpractices in the Dental Practice in the Town Of Plovdiv – Bulgaria Over A 5-Year Period","authors":"N. Musurlieva, M. Stoykova, S. Novakova","doi":"10.12974/2311-8695.2017.05.02.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In their work, dentists sometimes allow malpractices to occur. The aim of this study is to investigate the nature of the “adverse consequences” that may serve as grounds for claims from patients to the Professional Ethics Commission (PEC) and the Regional College (RC) of the Bulgarian Dental Association (BDA) in Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Material and methods: The documental method has been applied in investigating retrospectively 42 claims from patients to PEC-Plovdiv, filed in the period from 2011 to 2016, and the findings have been compared to those of similar investigations in Tehran and Turkey. Results and discussion: After an in-depth analysis, it was established that the actions that had resulted in claims filed with PEC-Plovdiv, were ‘errors’ in: prosthetics – 34%; surgical treatment – 6%; infringement of the rights of the patient (mostly – administered treatment without the informed consent of the patient) – 10%; mounting implants – 50% (prostheses and surgical treatment as part of implantology are also included here). According to foreign publications, errors in prostheses and surgical interventions are the most common. The same errors have been found to be the most common in Plovdiv, too, in addition to errors in implantology. In Bulgaria, as well as in many other countries, there is no register of dental malpractices. Conclusion: The adverse consequences of dental treatment have been established to be of the same origin in the 3 surveyed regions. The safety strategies are designed to prevent unintentional injuries to the patient. ","PeriodicalId":76664,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of the American College of Dentists","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of the American College of Dentists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12974/2311-8695.2017.05.02.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In their work, dentists sometimes allow malpractices to occur. The aim of this study is to investigate the nature of the “adverse consequences” that may serve as grounds for claims from patients to the Professional Ethics Commission (PEC) and the Regional College (RC) of the Bulgarian Dental Association (BDA) in Plovdiv, Bulgaria. Material and methods: The documental method has been applied in investigating retrospectively 42 claims from patients to PEC-Plovdiv, filed in the period from 2011 to 2016, and the findings have been compared to those of similar investigations in Tehran and Turkey. Results and discussion: After an in-depth analysis, it was established that the actions that had resulted in claims filed with PEC-Plovdiv, were ‘errors’ in: prosthetics – 34%; surgical treatment – 6%; infringement of the rights of the patient (mostly – administered treatment without the informed consent of the patient) – 10%; mounting implants – 50% (prostheses and surgical treatment as part of implantology are also included here). According to foreign publications, errors in prostheses and surgical interventions are the most common. The same errors have been found to be the most common in Plovdiv, too, in addition to errors in implantology. In Bulgaria, as well as in many other countries, there is no register of dental malpractices. Conclusion: The adverse consequences of dental treatment have been established to be of the same origin in the 3 surveyed regions. The safety strategies are designed to prevent unintentional injuries to the patient. 
在保加利亚普罗夫迪夫镇牙科实践的渎职研究超过5年期间
在他们的工作中,牙医有时会允许不法行为发生。本研究的目的是调查“不良后果”的性质,这些后果可能成为患者向保加利亚普罗夫迪夫的保加利亚牙科协会(BDA)的职业道德委员会(PEC)和区域学院(RC)索赔的理由。材料和方法:采用文献法对2011年至2016年期间提交的42例PEC-Plovdiv患者索赔进行回顾性调查,并将调查结果与德黑兰和土耳其的类似调查结果进行比较。结果和讨论:经过深入分析,确定导致向PEC-Plovdiv提交索赔的行为是“错误”:假肢- 34%;手术治疗- 6%;侵犯患者权利(主要是在未经患者知情同意的情况下实施治疗)- 10%;安装假体- 50%(假体和手术治疗作为假体学的一部分也包括在内)。根据国外出版物,假体和手术干预的错误是最常见的。同样的错误也被发现在普罗夫迪夫中最常见,除了植入学中的错误。在保加利亚,以及在许多其他国家,没有牙科事故的登记。结论:在调查的3个地区,牙科治疗的不良后果具有相同的根源。安全策略的设计是为了防止对病人的意外伤害。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信