Figure 1 Compensated and uncompensated endodontic malpractice claims (n=1271) by year.
Characteristics of cases |
In 2002-2006 |
In 2011-2013 |
p value |
Patients |
|
|
0.86 |
Service sector |
|
|
|
Dentists General practitioner (%) |
93 |
94 |
<0.001
|
Type of tooth |
|
|
|
Table1 Characteristics of endodontic malpractice claims in Finland in 2002-2006 and 2011-2013; p values refer to differences between the time periods.
Aspects of process and |
In 2002-2006 |
In 2011-2013 |
p value |
Instrumentation
|
|
|
|
Preoperative radiograph |
|
|
|
Apex location by
|
|
|
|
Perforation |
|
|
|
Broken instrument |
|
|
|
Table2 Process-related technical aspects and injuries in endodontic malpractice cases in Finland in 2002-2006 and in 2011-2013; p values refer to differences between the time periods.
Type and occurrence |
|
In 2002-2006 |
|
In 2011-2013 |
Difference by period |
|||||
|
C (%) |
NC (%) |
1p value |
|
C (%) |
NC (%) |
1p value |
2p value |
||
Perforation |
|
76 |
24 |
<0.001 |
|
78 |
22 |
<0.001 |
<0.001 |
|
Broken instrument |
|
47 |
53 |
0.78 |
|
32 |
68 |
<0.001 |
<0.001 |
Table3 Decisions of indemnity for claims related to endodontic malpractice by type of injury in Finland in 2002-2006 and in 2011-2013; C = Compensation, NC = No compensation; 1p values refer to differences within each time period, and 2p values, between the time periods.
Factors and the |
In 2002-2006 (n=668) |
In 2011-2013 (n=603) |
||
OR |
95% CI |
OR |
95% CI |
|
Service sector |
|
|
|
|
Dentist’s gender |
|
|
|
|
|
4.4 |
2.9, 6.8 |
6.6 |
4.3, 10.3 |
|
1.0 |
0.7, 1.4 |
0.5 |
0.3, 0.7 |
Table4 Strength of selected factors related to decisions of indemnity for endodontic malpractice claims in Finland in 2002-2006 and in 2011-2013, by means of odds ratios (OR) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI); for bolded OR values, p<0.05; ref. = reference category.