Medical malpractice might make the headlines, but that does not mean that dental malpractice never happens. In fact, perhaps because of the less stringent methods of professional oversight and fewer regulations on practitioners, dental malpractice claims constitute a significant portion of the overall number of medical malpractice claims in the United States every year. According to the American Board of Legal Medicine, 12.1% of medical malpractice payments were made against dentists.

Like many legal issues in the medical community, there are a handful of elements at play to explain these numbers.

Lack of Credentialing a Piece of the Puzzle

While medical boards and hospitals require that doctors become credentialed in order to perform specific procedures, state dental boards tend not to be involved in this process. The hands-off attitude often leads to dentists performing serious dental procedures that they have little to no formal training in. This does not happen on the medical side of the field, due to the strict oversight that credentialing committees have, and their ability to withhold surgical privileges to medical professionals that do not hold up to their standards of training.

Dominance of Small Practices Play a Part

Medical doctors and surgeons tend to congregate in specialized practices or in hospitals. The field of dentistry, however, is largely comprised of general practitioners who operate their own business, either on their own or with a very small number of other dentists.

The predominance of general dentists who run a solo practice in the world of dentistry has a spillover effect: Most of those who serve on dental boards are, themselves, general dentists who run a solo practice. As a result, these boards are highly unlikely to pass regulations that make it more difficult for general dentists to practice advanced oral surgeries.

Lack of Oversight Creates a Greater Need for Legal Advice

Unfortunately, the freedom that comes with a lack of oversight in the dental community has a downside, as well, which can impact both landed dentists, as well as those professionals who are just starting to get into the field.

For dentists with an established dental practice, the loose regulatory world that they work in often leads to decisions that can result in serious financial liability. It is a sensitive decision as to whether a dentist should perform an unfamiliar dental surgery that potentially carries a high risk to your patient is a serious decision to make. It could be a big boost to your business. If something goes wrong, however, you could be facing a lawsuit.

For new dentists, the lack of a local regulatory scheme can make it difficult to determine what has to be done to begin a new practice. Even though there are fewer requirements to be met, missing a single one can delay the opening of your practice or can later result in serious errors that could undermine your practice once it is established.

GEORGIA ATTORNEYS REPRESENT DENTAL PROFESSIONALS

Whether you have a thriving dental practice or are just getting your feet on the ground, having a solid legal representative on your side to steer you through the legal issues is a must. The attorneys at Levy Pruett Cullen have extensive experience representing dentists and other health care professionals. Contact use for legal work on all of your administrative or legal defense situations.

Physician Lawsuits Increase

Doctors who get sued once for malpractice are likely to be sued again. The more times a doctor is sued and the more times he pays out, the more likely it is to happen again. A vigorous and strong defense in a malpractice case is the only way to halt the financial hemorrhaging.

Strong defense is best protection in today's litigious society.

If a doctor is sued once and loses, his chances of being sued again go up. If he loses two cases, the chances rise yet again.

It gets worse. The more times a physician is sued for malpractice and loses, the more he's likely to face more challenges. The New England Journal of Medicine just published a comprehensive report studying the prevalence of malpractice lawsuits.

It's not encouraging news.

"Approximately 1% of all physicians accounted for 32% of paid claims. Among physicians with paid claims, 84% incurred only one during the study period (accounting for 68% of all paid claims), 16% had at least two paid claims (accounting for 32% of the claims), and 4% had at least three paid claims (accounting for 12% of the claims). In adjusted analyses, the risk of recurrence increased with the number of previous paid claims," the report's synopsis states.

A report in the New York Times puts it slightly differently: "A doctor who had two paid claims was twice as likely to have another as a doctor who had one, and a doctor who had six or more paid claims was 12 times as likely to have another."

The Times blog and the NEJM report point a finger at doctors. "...[D]octors who accumulate multiple claims are a problem, and a threat to the health care system. Identifying these high-risk doctors is a key first step toward doing something about the problem," said study co-author David M. Studdert.

Are doctors the problem or is the real problem opportunistic lawyers who see easy targets?

I believe doctors who don't mount an adequate defense against malpractice cases make the problem worse. The study says more lawsuits are likely when doctors have to pay out a settlement. If the same study was done and looked at doctors who were sued, but did not pay claims, I believe the results would show future malpractice claims dropped sharply.

Personal injury attorneys are not going to go after doctors if the lawsuit takes a lot of effort. No attorney likes to invest time without being compensated. Such attorneys will go after doctors with a history of paying claims. There are too many easy targets out there, as the NEJM study indicates.

The Times blog says as much: "...[A] doctor who had six or more paid claims was 12 times as likely to have another."

Doctors who mount a vigorous defense to challenge the malpractice claims are less likely to be sued in the future. If you are facing a malpractice case or a challenge to your practice, it is important to consider the ramifications on your state license to practice medicine.

Also, it is important to vigorously defend patient accusations that do not make it to courts of civil claims. If you are contacted by a state licensing board with allegations of any sort, you need someone who can help guide you through the process. With nearly 20 years of experience and countless successful results, contact one of the Atlanta Medicare Fraud Lawyers at Frances Cullen, P.C. so we work together to defend your right to practice medicine.

In a growing acceptance that addiction is a physical disease, ten medical institutions have recently introduced the first accredited residency programs in addiction medicine. The one-year residency programs, accredited by the American Board of Addiction Medicine, will follow a physician's primary residency in internal or family medicine and will, hopefully, expand understanding by the public and other physicians that addiction is a complex disease, as well as expanding knowledge and application of a wide range of treatment options.

Acknowledging problems with physicians' communication skills, in a welcome change, more medical schools are including a "people skills test" for physicians as part of their education. NY Times, July 11, 2011. Ironically, this coincides with the increasing pressure on many physicians to limit the time spent with patients due to insurance coverage limitations, especially in the area of psychiatry. (NY Times, March 6, 2011)

In the recent case of Williams v. Booker, the Georgia Court of Appeals rejected the plaintiff's claim of negligence based on facts that Williams was an active alcoholic at the time of her surgery. Instead, the court affirmed its earlier opinions that "in medical malpractice suits, evidence of a physicians' alcohol or drug use or addiction is relevant and admissible only when there is evidence from which the jury may infer that the physician was under the influence of alcohol or drugs at the time of the allegedly negligent treatment." Williams v. Booker, A11A0634, A11A0635.