<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=947635702038146&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">

The Year Implant Course

course-img_small.jpg
Find Out More

Subscribe to Email Updates

Latest Blog Post

When the GDC came 2.0 - Part 4

Colin Campbell
by Colin Campbell on 20/11/20 18:00

Bear traps and mine fields

- Click here to read part 3 

On reflection and complete review of the case involved in this blog series; it was clear that the bear traps were being dropped all over the place and the mines were being laid.

As I’ve explained in the previous posts I had never seen the individual patient myself as it’s not an area of dentistry for which I have expertise.

On two occasions through the 18-month period the patient had requested to see me specifically as the clinical lead in the practice because they were suffering irritation and minor symptoms associated with the treatment previously carried out.

Coincidentally on both of those occasions I was on holiday when the patient requested the visit and was directed by one of my team to someone with more expertise in this area than me, which they gladly accepted and were happy to proceed with.

The patient carefully noted every aspect of this level of care so that it could be regurgitated later.

It is not an exaggeration to suggest that the patient communicated with the clinic regarding minor symptoms, appointment considerations, queries and requests for appointments but mostly requests for information, radiograph and case notes on over a hundred occasions throughout their treatment.

Every single communication was answered appropriately by the team and logged.

The patient though would contact by email and before there was time for a response their email would follow up by telephone asking further questions which would therefore cross the email.

Once the email was received, they would once again telephone regarding the receipt of the responses in the email but transfer that to telephone.

It became a complicated web which was dealt with magnificently by our front of house team.

Once the two bound volume 72 page complaint was received it was clear that the patient intended to utterly unpick every single aspect of communication that had been received in the hope of finding a hole that we could not fill.

This was constructed as a pseudo intellectual exercise, trying to ‘build a case’ ala Miss Marple in some sort of dramatic ‘who done it’. It was presented as a fait accompli with a flourish like a magician shouting ‘ta-da’ as they presented the rabbit from the hat.

“The Campbell Clinic are crooks, and they are just out to steal patient’s money therefore I am due a huge pay-out”.

5 individual clinicians at The Campbell Clinic were implicated in this but interestingly only three were due to pay money into the complaint.

In the complaint itself three were heavily implicated but later a further two would also be dragged through the GDC. 

We find ourselves in a difficult situation with patients such as this because they cast them adrift because you’re scared that they’re laying bear traps and mines is to not represent them correctly as a healthcare individual.

To retain them in the practice and to try to help is to run the risk of further traps and mines.

A no win situation?

Certainly a tough win.

By the time you realise quite how many bear traps have been laid; you’re already caught in the spiders’ web.

It was going to take an extraordinary amount of work to try and deconstruct this at a time when the world was on fire and our newly opened specialist clinic was about to shut with no income whatsoever for 3 months.

You couldn’t write this stuff, honestly, you couldn’t write it.

 

Blog Post Number - 2559 

Leave a comment

Colin Campbell
Written by Colin Campbell
Written by Author