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.
At all times material to this Complaint, Respondent was a licensed dentist within the State of Florida, having been issued license number DN 14304.
Respondent's address of record is 1760 Coral Way, Miami, Florida 33145.
Filed December 17, 2012 4:32 PM Division of Administrative Hearings
Respondent provided dental treatment to Patient D.P. from on or about September 25, 2006, through on or about January 8, 2007.
The Department of Health received a Medical Malpractice Closed Claim Report from the Florida Office of Insurance Regulation, regarding a
$25,000.00 payment by Respondent's insurance company to Patient D.P., for an improper root canal on tooth number 30. The claim was settled by the parties with no further court proceedings on August 3, 2009.
On or about September 25, 2006, Patient D.P. presented to Respondent as a new patient for the purposes of establishing a general dentist-patient relationship. Some charting of existing conditions was done, and radiographs were exposed.
The treatment notes maintained by Respondent for Patient D.P's dental treatment do not clearly delineate the date(s) upon which root canal treatment was performed on tooth number 30.
The Medical Malpractice Closed Claim report lists the date of the root canal performed on tooth number 30, as January 8, 2007.
Respondent's treatment notes for the January 8, 2007, visit by Patient D.P., failed to document any details of a root canal being performed
- 2 -
J: \PSU\Medical\Dentistry\Jeff Peters\ACslO\Gonzalez09-18097(x)(m).doc
on tooth number 30. The entry for this date only recorded a prophy being completed.
Respondent's treatment notes recorded for the October 29, 2006,
visit by Patient D.P., document a root canal was recommended for tooth number 30. The treatment notes are inadequate for this date. It is unclear if root canal treatment was performed on tooth number 30 at this appointment.
The Single Patient Ledger for Patient D.P. dated October 24, 2007, records root canal treatment on tooth number 30 being performed on September 25, 2006 and on October 30, 2006. Patient D.P. was billed for a root canal treatment that was purportedly performed on September 25, 2006 and October 30, 2006.
The treatment notes maintained by Respondent, failed to adequately record details about a root canal being performed on Patient D.P.'s tooth number 30, on or about September 25, 2006.
The treatment notes maintained by Respondent, failed to record any details about a root canal being performed on Patient D.P.'s tooth number 30, on or about October 30, 2006.
The root canal treatment Respondent performed on Patient D.P's tooth number 30 was incomplete. The treatment notes do not clearly record
- 3 -
J:\PSU\Meclical\Dentistry\Jeff Peters\ACsl0\Gonzalez09-18097(x)(m).doc
the dates on which root canal treatment was performed on tooth number 30. It appears that some root canal treatment was performed between September and December 2006.
The Respondent performed an inadequate endodontic obturation on tooth number 30. The radiographs taken of tooth number 30 revealed an incomplete root canal on tooth number 30.
Respondent exposed Patient D.P. to potentially dangerous infection by leaving the root canal on tooth number 30 incomplete.
Patient D.P. had problems with tooth number 30 and ultimately sought treatment from another dentist. On or about July 26, 2007, Patient
D.P. saw a subsequent treater who extracted tooth number 30.
The minimum standards of performance in diagnosis and treatment for a root canal treatment require that a dentist adequately obturate the root canal performed on the tooth. These same standards require that the dentist complete the root canal treatment undertaken on a tooth.
Respondent failed to adequately obturate the root canal on tooth number 30, and/or failed to complete the root canal on tooth number
By failing to adequately document in Patient D.P.'s dental records, the details of the root canal treatment performed on tooth number 30.
Based on the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 466.028(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2006-2007), by failing to keep written dental records and medical history records justifying the course of treatment of Patient D.P.
H. Frank Farmer, Jr., MD, PhD, FACP
4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C-65 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3265 Florida Bar No. 718343 850.245.4640
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.
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.
