The Dental Complaints Service (DCS) has received a lot of attention this summer and not all of it has been positive. But I believe that’s partly due to the dental profession not fully understanding our remit. I would like to try to clarify that and demonstrate the success of the service.
First of all, I should say that promotion and marketing of the DCS is not a new development; we regularly run campaigns to ensure the public and patients, as well as registrants and other advice bodies such as Trading Standards and Citizens Advice, are aware of the service it offers. At the end of 2012 there was a national radio campaign to promote the DCS which attracted public interest and there has been online marketing to ensure that the DCS is recognised in web searches.
It is a key role of a regulator to ensure the patient’s voice is heard. Indeed, it is at the heart of the recommendations
by Robert Francis QC, in his report published in 2013. Therefore it is important that patients are aware of the DCS.
The General Dental Council’s research with patients shows that awareness is low; only 21 per cent of the public had heard of the DCS in 2012 which was an increase from 13 per cent in 2011. This shows an appropriate and necessary need to continue to market the service and that need led to the campaign that featured in The Guardian, Saga and The Telegraph.
But let me be clear, less than four per cent of the DCS costs are used in marketing (below the market average of 8.01 per cent for public sector/charities).
It’s fair to say that the surprise and anger expressed by the profession about this campaign has also surprised staff at the DCS. The comments this particular advert prompted has shown us very clearly that there is confusion in the profession about the difference between the GDC’s fitness to practise process and the Dental Complaints Service.
The GDC’s fitness to practise requirements are statutory and it is obliged to run them, they cover matters of impaired fitness to practise for both private and NHS care. The DCS is nonstatutory and offers a unique service where people can bring complaints about private dentistry.
The DCS team is highly trained to recognise fitness to practise matters and refer them immediately. The DCS is very successful, but if we don’t promote it, people won’t use it.
What the DCS is, and does
Set up by the General Dental Council in 2006, the DCS is now in its eighth year and has proven to be an extremely effective complaints resolution service. Based in Croydon in south London, the service comprises of 10 staff, including myself. We are supported by 75 trained volunteer panelists. We’re here to help patients and dental professionals put things right when problems with private dental treatment arise. Our service is free of charge and completely impartial, and much of our success is down to professionals working with us to find a solution in an often very stressful situation.
The types of complaints about private dental care being dealt with by the team at the DCS are not dealt with by any other organisation. Far from increasing the GDC’s workload, we are dealing – very effectively – with complaints that might otherwise end-up at the door of the GDC’s, much more costly, fitness to practise department. From July 2013 to June 2014 we’ve dealt with more than 8,500 calls.
For the most part they’ve been from patients and have been about:
- Dentures;
- Crowns;
- Fillings;
- Root canal treatments;
- Bridges and;
- Pain, service and cost.
How we work
The first thing our advisers will ask any caller is whether they’ve tried to sort out the problem at the practice already. A clear, in-house, complaints procedure is key to allowing this to happen and many complaints will be resolved at this point. Indeed the new ‘Standards for the dental team’, which was launched last September, includes an entire, stand-alone principle about having “a clear and effective complaints procedure” in place. Not having one in place could in fact become a fitness to practise issue. But if this process has been gone through and either side still isn’t happy, then we can step in to act as an impartial third party.
We will not contact a dental professional in relation to a complaint unless the patient has put their complaint in writing detailing their concern and how they would like the dental professional to resolve this. As a general guideline we would advise
patients to anticipate a response within 10 working days. If the patient does not receive a reply within this timeframe or is dissatisfied with the response received, it is at this stage that the DCS would step in to assist.
Our process
We would require a signed consent form from the patient giving the DCS authority to speak to the dental professional concerned. We would also request copies of any correspondence that had been exchanged between both parties.
The DCS will contact the dental professional, introduce themselves and give a summary of the complaint that has been raised. The dental professionals will be invited to give their view of the situation, and a discussion may then take place around how the complaint can be resolved.
The DCS would never insist on an immediate answer and will always suggest that the dental professionals contact their indemnifiers for advice. On occasion dental professionals have asked the DCS to contact their indemnifiers directly in order to
progress the complaint.
In the majority of cases the complaint is resolved at this stage. However, if this does not happen and if both parties are in agreement, a panel meeting would be held. This is the final stage of our complaints process.
The meeting would be held in a venue which is local to both parties. The panel consists of two lay members (one of these being a chair) and one dental professional. They will hear both sides of the complaint and work towards facilitating an amicable resolution. If an agreement can’t be reached, the panel will make a recommendation in order to resolve the complaint.
The recommendation could be:
- Closing the case with no further action;
- Asking the professional to consider remedial work;
- Asking the professional to make a contribution towards remedial treatment;
- Asking them to offer an apology;
- Asking them to offer a refund.
References available on request.