Court decisions in criminal proceedings for dental malpractice in Taiwan

Indian Dental Malpractice Claims and Lawsuits: A Medico-Legal Analysis

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.

Dental malpractice lawsuit in the madinah region

Background

The number of reports of dental malpractice cases has been increasing in recent years. The purpose of this study was to assess the data and outcomes related to dental malpractice claims in Madina City, Saudi Arabia.

Methods

This study conducts a retrospective study of dental malpractice claims in Madina city, Saudi Arabia assessing 97 cases of dental malpractice claims from the year 2016 to 2022.

Results

the study showed that the highest percentage of cases (29.9%) were reported guilty in the year 2021. with the highest number of claims (30%) related to the prosthodontic specialty. Most of the cases were against general practitioners (64.9%). Most of the cases (71.1%) lacked signed informed consent.

Conclusion

To decrease the number of dental claims, valuing specialties and obtaining informed consent should be considered by all dentists.

The descriptive analysis of civil court decisions of dental malpractice related to infection in Taiwan

The evaluation of dental malpractice claims database is helpful to analyze the risk and lower the chances of potential litigation. In this descriptive analysis, the Taiwan Judicial Judgment Database was used to analyze the civil court decisions of dental malpractice related to infection from January 1, 2000 to August 31, 2023. After rigor verdicts reviewed, 53 dental malpractice civil judgments related to infection were included and further analyzed. Total 15 lawsuits were required to recover the punitive damages. The overall civil conviction rate was 28.3%. Two cases occurred in the dental department at medical center and 13 cases were found in the local clinics. The top one awarded compensation is dental implant. The amount of compensation was ranged from NT$ 110,000 to NT$ 3,000,000. In conclusion, this analysis can provide the important information and reference in the amounts of compensation for dental malpractice in Taiwan.

Endodontic malpractice litigations in the United States from 2000 to 2021

Background/purpose

Little is known regarding the outcomes and distinguishing characteristics of lawsuits related to endodontic procedures. This study used a verdict-based data from United States of America to analyze the factors associated with endodontic malpractice lawsuits and mitigate the risk of litigation.

Materials and methods

The LexisNexis legal database was used to search for endodontic malpractice cases from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2021 using the terms "medical malpractice" and (I) "endodontist" (II) "endodontics" (III) "root canal" (IV) "dental pulp." Each case was reviewed for reported medical characteristics and litigation outcomes.

Results

A total of 650 cases were initially identified, and 97 cases were included in the final analysis. Eighty-four (86.6%) of the 97 defendants were general practitioners; 42 cases favored the plaintiff, 53 (54.6%) favored the defendant, 1 was partial win/loss, and 1 was settled. The annual case mean was 4.41 ± 2.17 (Mean ± SD). The major allegations favored for the patients involving paresthesia, root perforation, rubber dam not use, wrong tooth therapy, and infections. Plaintiffs who claimed with post-procedural reasons had a significantly higher winning rate than non-post-procedural reasons (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

In the present study, 54.6% of endodontic litigation favored the dentists in the US. The authors recommend that general practitioners refer complicated cases to endodontists and treat carefully to avoid paresthesia, canal perforation and infections. Clinicians should always diagnose and treat correctly, shared decision making with the patient, use rubber dam routinely, and timely management to prevent malpractice claims.

Dental malpractice lawsuit cases in Saudi Arabia: A national study

Introduction

Over the past twenty years, dental practice in Saudi Arabia has developed considerably, along with increase in population's knowledge of their rights. However, there is a lack of evidence and research on dental malpractice lawsuit cases in Saudi Arabia. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and content of legal suits regarding dental malpractice in Saudi Arabia, and to explore the factors and circumstances that were associated with these cases.

Methods

This was a retrospective study on dental malpractice litigation cases between January 2017 and December 2020. Only cases with final court verdicts were included. The cases were collected from 13 Medico-Legal Committee (MLC) across Saudi Arabia while practitioners' data were retrieved from the General Directorate of Healthcare Licensing at Ministry of Health (MOH). A designed data sheet was used, which was categorized into three main sections: plaintiff demographic data, defendant demographic, data case details in the court.

Results

During the four years period, 864 cases with verdicts were studied. Most of the cases were against general dental practitioners, and majority of complaints involved prosthodontic procedures followed by endodontics. The majority of the malpractice lawsuit cases (93 %) were against non-Saudi dental practitioners and 72 % were against experienced practitioners with more than ten years of experience. Almost all cases were in the private sector. Only 10 % of cases had a consent form previously provided to the patients before treatment, and most of cases lacked proper medical documentation. The mean average trial period was 3.3 months and 76 % of defendants were found guilty.

Conclusion

The number of cases is rising since 2017. Good documentation, compliance to informed consent protocols and dental privileges helped practitioners to avoid being found guilty.

Changes in Certitude, Adherence, and Attitude: Immediate Effects of Rape Myth Intervention on Jurors in a Mock Trial

Previous studies have demonstrated the prevalence and negative consequences of rape myths in various social contexts, including their impact on jury decision-making. The current study adopted a mixed methods design to explore how educating jurors about rape myths via a judge's direction affected their decision-making regarding the guilt or innocence of a defendant in a rape case. Data were obtained from two mock trials and 12 questionnaire responses. The sample consisted of 12 women participants aged from 20 to 25. The thematic analysis indicated that participants who received rape myths education exhibited resistance to rape myths, increased scrutiny of the defendant as opposed to the complainant, and less disbelief of the complainant's alleged behaviours. Quantitative analysis suggested a strong positive correlation between the understanding of rape myths education and its influence on decision making; however, this was only found in the intervention group. Findings showed insights into the possible advantages of rape myths education for jurors that were delivered via the judge's direction. Future research directions and implications were discussed.