Can patients detect hazardous dental practice? A patient complaint study.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to: determine the prevalence and distribution of patient/family-generated, dentistry-related complaints to Regional State Administrative Agencies (AVIs) and the National Supervisory Authority for Welfare and Health (Valvira) in Finland from 2000 to 2011, study patient/family safety incident experiences and other reasons for complaints, assess complaint validity and evaluate factors associated with disciplinary processes against dentists.

Design/methodology/approach: Data included closed cases handled by AVIs and Valvira (2000-2011) against dental practitioners or dental practice units (n=782). The authors analysed the complaints distribution and examined the antecedent factors and circumstances.

Findings: This study demonstrated that patients/families can detect many dental treatment hazards, substandard processes and even serious safety risks rather well. The investigation processes revealed some physical harm or potential patient safety (PS) risks in more than half the alleged cases. Many complaints accumulated against certain individuals and statistically significant positive correlations were found between some patient/family complaints, dentist-specific variables and disciplinary actions.

Practical Implications: Patient/family-generated complaints must be taken seriously and seen as relatively good safety risk indicators. However, more knowledge on how patients might cooperate with dental care providers to prevent errors is needed.

Originality/value: This work provides a unique opportunity to learn from several dentistry-related patient complaints. Despite some limitations, patient complaints appear to be useful as a complementary source together with other PS study methods.