January 20, 2021

College to review over 1.1 million billing as dental fight intensifies

BC The College of Dental Surgery has been ordered to take another crack in the investigation into a dentist.

A The results were released last month, The provincial health industry review board may call the college’s inquiry inquiry into the complaint “because – among other things – the two investigators who saw the file failed to speak to a key witness.

The Review Panel acts as an appeals panel for persons who are not satisfied with the outcome of the complaint to the disciplinary decision.

This result is the latest development in the fight between dentists sharing an office space; No man is named.

Tooling Dentists

The complainant – the dentist – said he was concerned in 2013 after talking to a certified dental assistant who had resigned from the dentist practice because he “felt he had no choice” because of concerns about what he saw as unnecessary procedures.

Those concerns were renewed when the dentist saw one of the former patients of Dentist B.

Complained by a dentist who shared office space with a colleague. (Keith Burgess / CBC)

Dentist A complained about his own analysis of 40 of the other man’s patient files, comparing them with other dental procedures and the contact numbers of two of his former office assistant’s assistants.

The process in question involves the use of unwanted needles and composite surfaces to treat cavities.

Dentist A. Billing said he has records showing “excessive treatment or overpayment for injections and overpayment of more than $ 1,100,000 for dental surfaces, most of which were within seven years.”

But he said college investigators never asked him for evidence.

‘Unusual fashion’

According to the review panel, the first investigator in the file did not “substantially analyze” the evidence.

The second investigator did not speak to former assistants or patients. The investigator asked the dentist for complete records of 22 patients – but ultimately relied on only nine files provided by Dentist A.

The procedure in question involves the use of needles and composite fillers to treat pits. (CBC)

The second investigator concluded that although the dentist may have performed a procedure in an unconventional manner, he “modified his practical philosophy to suit current thinking.”

“None of the practices I know of in cases of unethical and / or overcharging are included in this file,” the investigator wrote.

Following the complaint, the dentist signed a contract in 2019 agreeing to take the “Most Difficult Topics in Dentistry” course for dentists.

But the dentist was not satisfied with this decision – and went to the study team.

According to this decision, the College of Dental Surgery has now lodged a complaint against Dentist A.

“It is clear that the complainant has expended considerable personal resources to investigate the matter. As a result of those few efforts, the college has initiated a complaint against him,” it said.

“(The College) sought to classify the complainant’s efforts in this review as ‘reflecting an elevated view of his own character’ and as an attempt to ‘usurp’ the role of the College.”

‘What exactly did she notice?’

The dentist attacked the dentist for disclosing patient records to others, accusing him of being triggered by “improper intent.”

He said the abuse charge was “absolutely deserving” and that the dentist had a $ 420,000 unsubstantiated claim against him.

Douglas Cochran, chairman of the review panel, said one of the dentist’s former assistants said he did not want to be part of the investigation. But the college said the second girl should have gone.

“If (the certified dental assistant) leaves her job due to excessive billing / unnecessary treatment concerns, this is a serious step for an employee who has taken considerable time and expense to qualify for this job. It will not be an easy decision. What exactly did she notice?” Cochran wrote.

“According to the information received by the investigator and the inquiry committee, the failure to investigate strikes.”

Cochran said he was “nervous” because the dentist had changed his practice – the report’s explicit advice that the affair was over. The dentist said the college should have observed the “protocols” for keeping the money charged for treatment.

“If the commission of inquiry has no regulatory interest in improperly charging, it should be told directly,” Cochran wrote.

In a statement, the College of Dental Surgery said the complaint would be sent back to its investigative committee. But any investigation carried out will be confidential.

READ  Moore-Towers wins Marino Virtual Skate Canada Challenge Pair title