Mandatory Reporting, Impairment, and Peer Review
Mandatory reporting
Indiana law requires licensees and certain entities to report specified conduct, including impairment that may endanger patients and certain violations by other licensees. Failure to report can itself be a disciplinary violation. Reports to the Board or an approved impairment program are protected in defined circumstances; the peer-review privilege protects quality-improvement deliberations but is not a blanket shield for all records.
Impairment and peer review
A dentist who is impaired by drugs, alcohol, or a medical condition must not practice when patient safety is threatened. The Board may divert a licensee into a monitored recovery program, with treatment, random testing, work restrictions, and aftercare. Peer review committees review care and can refer matters; they do not replace the Board's disciplinary authority. Self-reporting early is generally better than waiting for a complaint, but it does not automatically erase discipline.
Worked example
A dentist suspects a colleague is diverting opioids and practicing while sedated. The correct response is to report to the Board or the approved impairment program and, if imminent harm exists, take immediate protective action. Keeping quiet because of friendship or because 'peer review will handle it' exposes the reporter and the patients.
Traps that cost marks
Believing confidentiality bars all reports. Assuming peer-review protection covers every document. Thinking self-report guarantees no discipline. Reporting only after a patient is injured.