Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 17 Dec 1996

Vol. 473 No. 1

Written Answers. - Dental Service.

Seán Haughey

Question:

99 Mr. Haughey asked the Minister for Health his views on the cancellation of three out of five dental appointments between 1 July 1996 and 2 December 1996 due to the non-availability of a dental nurse in respect of a child (details supplied) in Dublin 3 who was attending surgery at the Eastern Health Board dental clinic, North Strand, Dublin 3; if his attention has been drawn to the fact that other children who had taken time off schoold to attend were also sent home on those days; if he will intervene to rectify this apparent problem; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24395/96]

Limerick East): The provisions of dental treatment services to eligible persons in the Dublin 3 area is the statutory responsibility of the Eastern Health Board.

I have been advised by the board that a screening for second class pupils of the school referred to in the question was arranged to take place in North Strand dental clinic on 1 July 1996. Due to the unavailability of the examining dentist on that day this screening was postponed to 12 August 1996. As the screening was originally arranged through the school, the cancellation and rescheduling was also arranged through the school. This was done approximately ten days before the date arranged and children did not attend on that day.

When the child referred to in the question was seen, the screening indicated a treatment need and a subsequent appointment was given for the afternoon of 11 September 1996. On this particular afternoon the board was unable to provide cover for the absent regular dental nurse. The appointment was cancelled and postponed to 24 October 1996. During this appointment five fissure sealings were completed for the child.
A subsequent appointment for 2 December 1996 was arranged. On this date the dental nurse assigned to the clinic rang in sick at 9 a.m. and a substitute nurse was not available at such short notice. Those patients for whom telephone numbers were available were contacted and advised of new appointment times. It was not possible to advise others until they attended the clinic. The telephone number on the chart of the child in this case was not in service and directory inquiries advised that the number was "ex directory".
The board both understands and appreciates the frustration of patients and parents when appointments are cancelled at such short notice. It is something it dislikes doing and is always a matter of concern and frustration to the board also. However, in order to perform many dental procedures effectively and safely, the dental surgeon and dental nurse operate closely as a team. The absence of the dental nurse curtails this effectiveness to a greater or lesser degree. Frequently, it is not possible to perform some planned procedures in the time that has been allotted to them and postponement is the necessary option.
The need to maintain the highest possible level of proper cross-infection control in dental surgeries is of paramount importance. Without the assistance of a suitably trained nurse the level of these controls can diminish to a degree when both patient and operator can be put at risk. The current advice of medical protection societies is that it could be imprudent for a dentist to operate alone and this advice might well be considered to carry even more weight where young children are being treated.
The board wishes to again offer apologies for the inconvenience caused to the child and her family and hopes that future arrangements with the clinic will proceed more smoothly.
Top
Share