NHS dentist did more harm than good...

heartbreak_star

izzybella16 wrote: »

This is my point, NHS gives impression it provides an acceptable standard of dentistry when it does not!

Yes. Yes, it does. It gives a perfectly good standard of practical dentistry.

HBS x

brook2jack

The NHS provides virtually nothing in dentistry.

What it does is pay a set amount to contractors (dentists) who provide the dentistry, the buildings, the staff , the materials , the training etc.

The NHS has a fixed budget for dentistry and the question is how is that fixed budget best spent?

Dentistry is getting more and more expensive to provide with no real increase in fees for years and expenses inflation running at 10% per annum so it would seem some hard choices will have to be made. Surgeries that provide NHS dentistry cannot be run any more efficiently and as dentists pay has dropped by 20% in the last few years less and less people want the enormous strain of running a practice.

Many in dentistry would argue a core service providing basic fillings,extractions,scaling and dentures with anything else provided privately would be the best use of a limited budget.

However going back to the original point many dentists who do NHS work do so to the best of their ability in a deeply flawed system, but at a cost to their health, family life and bank balance. It's the reason I have done only a little NHS work since 2006 and now practice mostly privately.

justme111

heartbreak_star wrote: »

Yes. Yes, it does. It gives a perfectly good standard of practical dentistry.

HBS x

What do you know about dentistry to make such a statement?
You probably mean that YOU been happy with dental treatment you had on the NHS so far. Which is very possible , there are many people who are happy with their dental treatment on the NHS. It may be because you were lucky , it may be because you did not need much dental work, it may be because your dentist is a particularly good and conscientious one , it may be because your expectations are low and you are not aware what outcome you could have had as you must be not in a trade.
I despair , a couple of threads on this page with dentists spilling their guts , telling people how bad it is and proving it with numbers - still someone manages to state how good everything is.

Toothsmith

izzybella16 wrote: »

This is my point, NHS gives impression it provides an acceptable standard of dentistry when it does not!

heartbreak_star wrote: »

Yes. Yes, it does. It gives a perfectly good standard of practical dentistry.

HBS x

Actually - 'The NHS' provides no dentistry at all!

It;'s just a paymaster, and sets a few conditions.

It is up to the individual dentists providing treatment on their NHS contract what standard of dentistry they provide. If they provide crap, rushed dentistry - then that is their fault and their responsibility.

If someone cannot provide decent treatment (even if it's limited within the rules) Then they shouldn't be providing NHS treatment - and they shouldn't be making up extra 'rules' to suit themselves.

I decided in 1998 that I could not provide a level of dentistry I considered acceptable to patients on the NHS. So I went private. I kept kids on the NHS as what I made via private patients I could cross subsidise the NHS treatment on the kids.

In 2006 - when the latest NHS contract started - this would have become impossible for me to do. (I couldn't control who I saw for my NHS payment - I would have had to see adults as well. ) So I stopped NHS dentistry altogether.

izzybella16

It would be better for NHS contracts to be scrapped and for that money to be used promoting importance of good dental insurance and a check up every 12 months at the latest.

I think the dental industry, but not each individual dentist, knows this would be bad for business. If everyone had a check up every 6 months the requirement for anything other than small fillings would vastly decrease.

brook2jack

Having a check up every six months does not change peoples habits.

Up until 2006 6 monthly check ups were the norm. The decay rate in adults is less now than twenty years ago but the decay rate in children is increasing. That is not to do with how often a child attends the dentist but because the average UK child eats 7 times a day and an increasing portion of that is sugar.

theoretica

izzybella16 wrote: »

It would be better for NHS contracts to be scrapped and for that money to be used promoting importance of good dental insurance and a check up every 12 months at the latest.

What you are suggesting seems close to the US model, and that apparently does not lead to better teeth, especially for the less well off who would not afford dental insurance. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/british-people-have-no-worse-teeth-than-americans-study-says-a6775956.html

I suggest that NHS dentistry should lower people's expectations - it can and should be a great basic service to ensure no one need die for an abscess, or be unable to eat, but expecting it to meet the raised expectations of all that dental science is now capable of is unrealistic.

I would say the same of the NHS medical service too, and a model where the NHS draws a clear line of what is covered and what isn't, with supplementary insurace for what isn't would make sense to me.

justme111

Yes toothsmith.
Dentists who do not own practices do not have that choice though. That would be majority of dentists actually. They have other choices I suppose - to emigrate. To abandon dentistry. About 5% of them could find jobs working for someone like you. Yet another small part could do salaried services like prison or community clinic or emergency service. For majority it would be to either emigrate , abandon dentistry or become practice owner which means easily half a million loan and how many hours in management a week on top of working as a dentist?
Theoretica , it would been great. Nyit going to happen though as NHS us a holy cow.

Bowline

justme111 wrote: »

Well if she realised she messed the tooth up and chickened out and did not tell you - what would your complaint achieve in that case?

Well it may have been by accident but she should have told me if she did realise.

I find it concerning that you feel dishonesty would not be grounds for a complaint. If it were a doctor it would be, why not a dentist?

If there was a genuine mistake and she did not realise, fair enough.

If there was a genuine mistake and she realised and covered it up knowing that it could cause complications, then that needs to be addressed. If I did that in my job I'd be disciplined, dismissed or I could end up in prison.

justme111

"She should ", "grounds for complaint " , "addressed " ..
What harm has actually happened from her not telling you ?
Up to you whether you want to go on a crusade punishing the worker bee in a broken system . May be if more people complained there would be less worker bees tempted to take queens shilling and the system would collapse sooner...