Persistent Lip Numbness After Third Molar Surgery: Consent, Records and the Complaint
A 34-year-old woman had her lower right third molar (38) surgically removed five weeks ago under local anaesthesia in a private clinic in Beirut. The pre-operative panoramic radiograph showed the roots overlapping the inferior alveolar canal, and the operator's note read 'close to IAN'. The consent she signed was a single-page clinic form in English listing 'bleeding, infection, swelling'; she speaks Arabic at home and says nobody discussed numbness. She now has persistent numbness of the right lower lip and chin, with normal mouth opening and no swelling. She telephoned the clinic demanding her complete file and a full refund, and stating that she will complain to the Lebanese Order of Dentists and 'tell the newspaper'. That afternoon the clinic manager asks the dentist to add 'nerve injury discussed pre-operatively' to the record, and separately asks to photograph the patient for an Instagram post advertising the clinic's surgery, offering her a 30% discount.
1. Assess the consent process in this case and state what a defensible consent would have required.
Read the worked answer
What defensible consent requires A discussion, in Arabic or through a competent interpreter, of: the diagnosis and the reason for surgery; the alternatives (coronectomy, orthodontic or prosthetic management of the space, referral, or leaving the tooth with the associated risks); and the material risks specific to this patient. The panoramic finding of root-canal proximity is precisely what should have triggered a discussion of inferior alveolar and lingual nerve injury, and arguably a CBCT to define the relationship before operating.
The lapses here
- A generic English form listing only bleeding, infection and swelling does not evidence a discussion of nerve injury.
- A signature is not consent if the conversation did not happen; consent is a process, and the form is only its record.
- The language barrier was not addressed.
- There is no note recording that the specific risks were explained, or that she was offered a CBCT or referral.
The standard to apply What a reasonable patient in her position would want to know, in terms she could understand, including the possibility of permanent numbness. The clinical note 'close to IAN' shows the operator recognised the risk - which makes the absence of documented discussion harder to defend, not easier.
What to do now Reconstruct the timeline honestly from the notes, interview the assistant present, and do not fill gaps retrospectively. Write a contemporaneous account of what she now reports, dated today.
2. How should the dentist respond to the records request and to the manager's suggestion to amend the file? What about the refund demand?
Read the worked answer
Records Records are held by the practice, but the patient has a right of access to a copy of her clinical record: notes, the panoramic radiograph and any CBCT, the consent form, correspondence and all messages. Provide complete copies within a reasonable time, keep the originals, and document what was provided, when and to whom. Do not release them selectively or in summary form.
Never alter the record. Adding 'nerve injury discussed pre-operatively' today would be a fabrication. It is detectable through metadata, ink and sequencing, and through staff statements, and it converts a recognised clinical complication into a professional-integrity matter - which is far more damaging before the Order and in any civil claim than the complication itself. Refuse the instruction plainly, in writing if necessary, and record that the request was made and refused.
Refund Distinguish the fee from compensation for a complication. A goodwill refund may be offered where there has been a service failure, but it must never be made conditional on her not complaining, and it must not be framed as an admission of negligence that has not been established. Any offer should be made in writing, without pressure, and after advice from the professional liability insurer.
Communication Do not contact her informally through staff or social media. Keep every communication written, professional and in the file.
3. Outline the clinical follow-up for the numbness, the regulatory pathway, and how you would handle the social media request.
Read the worked answer
Clinical Persistent numbness at five weeks needs formal assessment and documentation: light touch, pinprick, two-point discrimination and mapping of the affected area, compared with the contralateral side, plus an assessment of taste and mouth opening. Refer to oral and maxillofacial surgery for neurosensory assessment and consideration of microneurosurgical repair within the appropriate window, or for counselling if that window has passed. Give an honest prognosis: many inferior alveolar nerve injuries improve over 6-12 months, some do not, and she should not be told either that it will certainly resolve or that nothing can be done. Offer review and a point of contact.
Regulatory pathway She has the right to complain to the Lebanese Order of Dentists, and depending on the issue to the Ministry of Public Health. The dentist should cooperate fully, provide factual records, and notify the professional liability insurer early. Attempting to dissuade her from complaining is itself a disciplinary matter.
Social media Refuse. Photographing and publishing an identifiable patient for marketing without specific written, revocable consent breaches confidentiality and privacy, and using a patient in the middle of a dispute is indefensible. A discount does not convert an unconscious patient into a consenting one. Record the refusal, and remind the manager in writing that clinical images require separate consent and must not make misleading claims.