Dec 19 2006 DEC-19-2@@6 11:15 AHCA STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, PETITIONER, OW-S) oy PL’ vs. CASE NUMBER: 2005-00448 GARY GOLDEN, D.DS,, RESPONDENT. ee | ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT COMES NOW, Petitioner, Department of Health, by and through its undersigned counsel, and files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Dentistry against the Respondent, Gary Golden, D.D.S., and in support thereof alleges: 1. Petitioner is the state department charged with regulating the practice of Dentistry pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 456, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 466, Florida Statutes. 2. At all times material to this Complaint, Respondent was a licensed dentist within the State of Florida, having been issued license number DN 2046. JAPSU\Medieal\wayne mitchell\7-04 LDNTI-AC'st\Goldnds -00448(x)dntroceln-rin.doc OL 44 40 ively DEC-19-2846 11:16 AHCA 3. Respondent's last known address of record is 3911 Hollywood Boulevard, Hollywood, Florida 33021. 4. The Respondent provided dental care and treatment to Patient H.N. as a regular patient from July 21, 2004, to on or about September 2, 2004. 5. Patient H:N. initially presented to the Respondent on July 21, 2004, complaining of worn out ill-fitting dentures. The Respondent performed a comprehensive exam, including x-rays, and informed Patient H.N. she would need a new partial lower and full upper denture which he would be able to correctly fit and seat for her. Patient H.N. agreed with this plan, and final impressions were taken for fabrication of the replacement dentures, 6. The Respondent failed to fully diagnose that the lower partial denture rocked back and forth and was in need of an immediate soft tissue base relining. Respondent also failed to note the root of tooth number 21 showed a darkened periapical apex, indicating need for root canal retreatment. 7. From on or about July 29, 2004, through August 9, 2004, Patient H.N. presented to the Respondent multiple times for crown 2 JAPSU\Medical\wayne mitchell\7-04 DNTL-AC's\Galdn05-00448(x)dntroccln-run.duc DEC-19-2@86 11:16 AHCA ~~ restoration at tooth number 20 to fit the existing lower partial denture and for fabrication and insertion of the new full upper denture. Patient H.N. continually complained the denture did not allow her to fully close her teeth, would not stay in place and did not fit right. The Respondent attempted to modify the full denture, proposed to do a reline and made adjustments over the next several weeks to remedy the patient’s complaints, without success. 8. On September 2, 2004, there was a notation in the treatment record that a chair-side reline of the upper denture was done in an effort to remedy the fit and non-retentiveness of the denture fabricated by the Respondent. A denture reline is usually performed to correct fit on worn dentures, but is generally not done within a month of delivery of a new denture. 9. It was subsequently determined that the denture was improperly fabricated for Patient H.N.’s mouth with over-extended buccal phalanges, misaligned anterior teeth to base setting, dysfunctional anterior occlusion which prevented Patient H.N. from closing her upper and lower teeth together, and the denture.was non- retentive and non-functional in Patient H.N.’s mouth. Patient H.N. did 3 JAPSU\Medicat\wayne mirchell\7-09f DNTL-AC'r\Goldnl5-00448(x)dntroceln-ren.doc wee 4 eu uA DEC-19-20@6 11:17 AHCA not return to the Respondent for further care after the September 2, 2004, appointment and filed this cornplaint in January 2005 alleging substandard care related to the placement of the denture by the Respondent. 10. The minimum standards of dental performance require a dentist to diagnose and plan for optimal prosthetic fittings, and requires the fabrication and placement of a denture which fits.properly and securely without occlusal misalignments between upper and lower teeth. 11. The Respondent did not replace or refabricate the defective upper denture or offer to reimburse Patient H.N. the expense of the denture so she could seek a subsequent prosthodontist. 12. Section 466.028(1)(x), Florida Statutes (2004), states that being guilty of incompetence or negligence by failing to meet .the minimum standards of performance in diagnosis and treatment when measured against generally prevailing peer performance, including, but not limited to, the undertaking of diagnosis and treatment for which the dentist is not qualified by training or experience or being 4 JAPSU\Medicul\wayne mitchell\7-04£NTI.-AC's\Gnldn05-00448(x)dnirocelnern.cloc eeu £49 ONY RO P.@6 DEC-19-2086 11:17 AHCA : guilty of dental malpractice, shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action by the Board of Dentistry. 13. The Respondent was negligent and failed to meet minimum standards of dental performance in diagnosing and treating Patient H.N. in one or more of the following ways: a) By failing to fully diagnose from a July 21, 2004, x-ray of Patient H.N.’s tooth number 21, that the root of tooth number 21 showed a darkened periapical apex, indicating likely need for root canal retreatment; b) By failing to properly fabricate a full upper denture without over-extended buccal phalanges, and/or a misaligned anterior teeth to base setting for Patient H.N.'s mouth; C) By failing to properly fabricate a full upper denture without a dysfunctional anterior occlusion which prevented Patient H.N. from closing her upper and lower teeth together; d) By failing to replace or refabricate the defective upper denture or offer to reimburse Patient H.N. the expense of the denture so she could seek remedial treatment from a subsequent prosthodontist; and/or e) By preparing and replacing dentures which did not fit Patient H.N.’s mouth properly and/or which were non- retentive, aesthetically compromised and non- functional in Patient H.N.’s mouth. The Respondent prepared and placed a substandard, unacceptable denture in Patient H.N.’s mouth. 5 JAPSU\Medical\ wayne mitchell\?-04 DNTL-AC's\Goldn05-00448(x)dntraccin-na.dec wee 4 oN DEC-19-2086 11:18 AHCA 14. Based on the foregoing, the Respondent has violated Section 466.028(1)(x), Florida Statutes (2004), by being guilty of incompetence or negligence by failing to meet the minimum standards of performance in diagnosis and treatment when measured ‘against generally prevailing peer performance, including, but not limited to, the undertaking of diagnosis and treatment for which the dentist is, not qualified by training or experience or being guilty of dental malpractice. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Dentistry enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties: revocation or suspension of the Respondent's license, restriction of practice, imposition of an administrative fine, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, corrective action, refund of fees billed or collected, remedial education and/or any other relief that the Board deems apprapriate. 6 VAPSU\Mcdical\wayne mitchell\7-04 EDNTL-AC's\Goldnt'5-0044 8(x)dntrocein-rmn.doc P.@8 DEC-19-28@6 11:18 AHCA eae SIGNED this g n day of Deremby , 2005. M. Rony Francois, M.D., M.S.P.H., Ph.D. Secretary, Department of Health Wayneitchell Assistant General Counsel FILED te DOH Prosecution Services Unit OEPANEPUTY CLERK, 4052 Bald Cypress Way Bin C-65 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3265 CLERK Wud, Loc. Plorida Bar #869414 GATE__iani"——— (850) 245-4640/ FAX: 245-4683 PCP: 12/9/05 PCP Members: CM, BK DOH vs. Gary Golden, D.D.S., Case No. 2005-00448 NOTICE OF RIGHTS Respondent has the right to request a hearing to be conducted in accordance with Section 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes, to be represented by counsel or other qualified representative, to present evidence and argument, to call and cross-examine witnesses and to have subpoena and subpoena duces tecum issued on his or her behalf if a hearing is requested. NOTICE REGARDING ASSESSMENT OF COSTS Respondent is placed on notice that petitioner has incurred costs related to the investigation and prosecution of : this matter. Pursuant to Section 456.072(4), Florida Statutes, the Board shall assess costs related to the investigation and Prosecution of a disciplinary matter, which may include attorney hours and costs, on the Respondent in addition to any other discipline imposed. 7 JAPSU\Mcdicol\wayne mitchcll\7-O4£ DNTL-AC's\Goldn05-00448(x)dntrocchi-rta.doc

Docket for Case No: 06-005164PL