Mrs X complained about the care and treatment her mother, Mrs Y, received from a Dental Practice (“the Practice”) in the area of Swansea Bay University Health Board. The investigation considered whether:
a) There was a failure to provide appropriate dental treatment on 24 February 2021, and whether this resulted in Mrs Y suffering with trigeminal neuralgia (a sudden, severe facial pain often described as a sharp shooting pain or like having an electric shock in the jaw, teeth or gums).
b) Mrs Y’s follow-up dental care was appropriate.
The Ombudsman found that the treatment Mrs Y received on 24 February was within the range of appropriate dental practice and in line with relevant standards; there was no evidence of service failure in the treatment provided or that there was a causal link between the anaesthetic injections given to Mrs Y before the tooth extraction procedure on this date and the later diagnosis of trigeminal neuralgia. The Ombudsman did not uphold this complaint.
The Ombudsman found that it was appropriate not to schedule a follow-up appointment for Mrs Y and that any follow-up appointment was a matter for Mrs Y. However, by the dentist’s own admission, follow-up care on 17 March was not in line with relevant guidance and she had taken action to reflect on the appointment and to re-familiarise herself with relevant guidance. Whilst failure to follow guidance is generally considered to be maladministration, there was no indication that the treatment received had any measurable adverse impact on Mrs Y. The complaint was not upheld.
