a STATE OF FLORIDA | ( DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH = - DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, “lug - viy PETITIONER, ADMIN ] Bey v. CASE NO. 2002-03248'"GS~ WADE HARROUFF, D.D.S., © " RESPONDENT. 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, Wade Harrouff, 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 2 licensed dentist within the State of Florida and was issued license number DN 10761. 3, ~ Respondent’s address of record is 267¢River Drive, Tequesta, Florida 33469. ~ 4. Respondent provided regular dental care and/or treatment to Patient E.B. from in or around January 2001 to on or about March 16, 2001. i 5. In or arou.w January 2001, Patient E.B. presd _d to the Respondent for a routine dental visit. The Respondent obtained a full mouth series of pre- operative, x-rays and examined Patient E.B’s mouth. Patient E.B’s x-rays indicated that he had jong-standing, generalized periodontal disease and bone loss. 6. The Respondent recommended cosmetic dentistry to improve Patient E.B’s smile, and Patient £.B. agreed. 7. The Respondent's treatment plan for Patient E.B. included a periodontal evaluation, full mouth bleaching, crowns for teeth numbers four through fourteen, and the extraction of tooth number seven. 8. espondent treated Patient E.B’s periodontal disease with scaling and root planning, although scaling and root planning are inadequate methods of addressing and/or treating the level of Patient E. B’s periodontal disease. 9. Respondent did not refer Patient E.B. to a specialist for treatment of his periodontal disease in order to stop and/or stabilize further progression of the disease. 10. Respondent did not allow Patient E.B. to recover from his periodontal disease nor did he allow an observation period to see whether Patient E.8. remained disease-free prior to commencing restorative treatments. ti. Itis the prevailing standard in the dental community to suspend cosmetic ¢ dentistry or restorative treatments in patients that have been diagnosed with serious periodontal disease until the disease has been treated and contained. 42. Onor about February 6, 2001, in pursuit of his restorative treatment plan for Patient E.B., Respondent extracted tooth number seven, performed a root cana! on Ww iy yund down teeth numbers three L wugh fourteen to prepare i tooth number four, ani. them for crown placements. : 13. Respondent over-prepared Patient E.B’s teeth numbers three through fourteen by grinding down the teeth, causing pulp exposures and necessitated endodontic treatment for teeth numbers six, eight, nine, ten, eleven and twelve. 14. Respondent's dental records for Patient E.B. did not justify the course of treatment of Patient E.B., in that the Respondent over-treated teeth numbers six, eight, nine, ten, eleven and twelve. 45. ~ Respordent documented in Patient E.B’s dental records that tooth number thirteen had exposed pulp, but tooth number thirteen was already missing. 46. | Respondent documented in Patient E.B.’s dental records that endodontic treatment was performed on tooth number four although tooth number four is a bicuspid. 47. Onor about March 13, 2001, Patient E.B. presented to the Respondent for continuation of his dental treatment. Respondent initiated root canal treatment on Patient E.B.s teeth numbers six and eight. During the root canal procedure, Respondent experienced difficulties anesthetizing Patient E.B. Respondent documented in Patient-E.B’s dental records that he was upset and shaking, that he experienced a ¢ panic attack, and that the pain of not being properly anesthetized brought Patient E.B. to tears. 18. Shortly afterwards, the Respondent managed to calm Patient £.B. and successfully administered anesthesia through a bone injection and was able to complete ty _ the root canal on teett) umbers six and eight, remove the ( es from both teeth, and to cement temporary crowns in place. . e_- = 19. Following treatment; Respondent documented in Patient E.B.s tental records that root canals were started on teeth numbers four, six, and eight and that patient E.B. had mild facial swelling. 20. On or about May 25, 2001, Respondent's office assistant called Patient E.B. to schedule completion of his root canal treatment, but Patient E.B. did not return. “~" CQUNT ONE — STANDARD OF CARE 21. Petitioner realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through twenty (20) as if fully set forth herein this Count One. 22. Section 466.028(1)(x), Florida Statutes (2000), states that failing to meet the minimum standards of performance in diagnosis and treatment when measured against generally prevailing peer performance is grounds for disciplinary action by the Board of Dentistry. 23, Respondent failed to refer Patient E.B. to a specialist for treatment of his long-standing, whole-mouth periodontal disease and bone loss prior to commencing restorative treatment of Patient E.B. @ 24, Respondent over prepared Patient E.B’s teeth’ numbers three through fourteen by drilling off too much enamel! from the teeth. ( / { { 25. Respo. -nt caused pulp exposures of Patie,.. <.B’s teeth and necessitated of teeth numbers six, eight, nine, ten, eleven, and ‘twelve, by endodontic treatment drilling off too much enamel from teeth numbers three through fourteen. 26. Based on the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 466.028(1)(x), Florida Statutes, 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. COUNT TWO-INADEQUATE DENTAL RECORDS 27. Petitioner realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through twenty (20) as if fully set forth herein this Count Two. 28. Section 466.028(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2000), states that failing to keep written dental records and medical history records justifying the course of treatment of the patient including, but not limited to, patient histories, examination results, test results, and x-rays if taken, is grounds for disciplinary action by the Board of Dentistry. 29. Rule 6485-17.002, Florida Administrative Code, provides that a dentist shall maintain written records for each patient, which shall contain any radiographs ¢ used for the diagnosis or treatment of the patient, 2 proposed treatment plan, and the treatment rendered to the patient. 30. Respondent failed to maintain dental records which justify the course of treatment, albeit over-treatment, €.g., Respondent over-treated teeth numbers six, eight, nine, ten, eleve.. and twelve, which caused Patierk _.B. to require endodontic treatment of these teeth. 31. Respondent failed to document in Patient E.B.’s dental records the justification for his failure to refer Patient E.B. to a specialist for treatment of his long- standing, whole-mouth periodontal disease and bone loss prior to commencing restorative treatment. 32. Respondent failed to correctly record examination results of Patient E.B.'s teeth, in that Respondent documented that tooth number thirteen had exposed pulp although tooth ‘number thirteen was already missing and that endodontic treatment was performed on tooth number four although tooth number four is a bicuspid. 33. Based on the foregoing, Respondent's license to practice dentistry in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 466.028(1)(m), Florida Statutes, as implemented by Rule 64B5-17.002, Florida Administrative Code, for failing to keep written dental records and medical history records justifying the course of treatment of the patient including, but not limited to, patient histories, examination results, test results, and x-rays if taken. WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board of Dentistry enter arm order imposing one or more of the following penalties: permanent revocation ¢ or suspension of 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 appropriate. I SIGNED this _ Sh day of { , 2003. John O. Agwunobi, M.D., M.B.A. Secretary, Department of Héalth’- z 7 . Q Bsa rah D. Cyrus a7, A A 07, Assistant General Counsel PAS A DOH Prosecution Services Unit Nee, WY 4052 Bald Cypress Way LANs NE Bin C-65 RIOR G Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3265 Oke Florida Bar # 412155 ge (850) 487-9692 a 8 (850) 488-1855 d and approved bys cee cintias 9/2 ¢ 3 (date) Reviewe pep: 5/75/23 pep Members: WH HG & & Wade Harroufi, D.D.S., Case #2002-03298 ( . Wade Harrouff, DL , Case #2002-03298 Poof os a =: a “NOTICE OF RIGHTS 04 lup » re Respondent has the right to request a head to be LGnagcted in accordance with Section 120.569 and 120.57, da; Statutes, to be represented by counsel or other qualified representa dita) resent evidence and argument, to call and cross-examine witnesses and to* ave 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. ( if | PATIENT INDEX , Wade Harrouff, D.D.S. Case No. 2002-03298. . Patient E.B. - Eugene Bradley Please refer to all patients by initials. Patient names and records are confidential. Ge z - Oe, BP. woe aN RE Oy ic Be ae @ & 2. -- oO

Docket for Case No: 04-001099PL