An after-hours email, no patient identifiers and a request to take an impression
At 9 pm a dentist emails the laboratory from a personal email account: 'Need a three-unit PFM bridge for the patient I saw today, tooth 46 missing, abutments 45 and 47. Just copy the old one. Invoice the patient directly. Also can you take the impression at your lab tomorrow because my nurse is away?' There is no patient name, date of birth or signed prescription, no shade, no alloy and no bite record. The patient is a 70-year-old Maori woman; the next morning her daughter phones the laboratory asking for the clinical details and says she wants to be present at the fitting. The laboratory owner is on leave and the receptionist is unsure what to say.
1. Identify the professional, ethical and legal issues in the dentist's request and explain what the laboratory can and cannot do.
Read the worked answer
The request has several problems.
First, there is no valid written prescription. A dental technician in New Zealand works to a prescription from a registered dentist, and the prescription needs patient identifiers, the dentist's details, the device required, materials, shade, and the dentist's signature or authenticated electronic equivalent. 'The patient I saw today' and 'tooth 46' are not enough to identify the patient or to defend the work if something goes wrong.
Second, 'just copy the old one' is not a design instruction. The old bridge may replicate an error, and the laboratory has no clinical information about the preparations, occlusion or periodontal status. The dentist must assess and prescribe.
Third, taking an impression at the laboratory is a clinical procedure. A dental technician's scope is to fabricate appliances on prescription, not to examine, impress or treat patients. Unless the person holding the appropriate scope is involved, this request must be declined.
Fourth, direct invoicing of the patient is not inherently unethical, but it must be a clear business arrangement and must not blur the clinical relationship. The dentist remains responsible for the clinical care and for explaining costs.
I would reply in writing that the laboratory cannot start until it receives a complete prescription and that the impression must be taken by the dentist or an appropriately qualified person.
2. How would you respond to the daughter, and what does cultural safety require here?
Read the worked answer
The daughter is asking for clinical details about her mother. I cannot confirm that the patient is even known to the laboratory, let alone discuss her care, without the patient's consent. I would say: 'I'm not able to discuss a patient's details over the phone. If your mother would like information shared with you, she can let us know, and we can then speak with you.' That respects her concern without breaching privacy.
Cultural safety is not just about being polite. It requires me to examine how the service I work in may make a Maori patient and her whanau feel unwelcome or excluded, and to change that. The daughter's request to be present at the fitting is a reasonable expression of whanau involvement. I would record the request, pass it to the dentist, and ask the dentist to discuss with the patient who she wants present and how information should be shared. I would also check that the laboratory has an interpreter or communication process if needed, and that staff do not make assumptions about the patient's ability to understand technical information.
The laboratory's role is to support the dentist's relationship with the patient, not to replace it. I would document the call, the advice given, and the referral back to the dentist.
3. What would you record, and what would you do if the dentist pressures the laboratory to start work without the missing information?
Read the worked answer
I would record the time and date of the email, the fact that it came from a personal account, the missing prescription elements, and my written response. I would record the daughter's call, what she asked, what I said, and that I referred the matter to the dentist. If any conversation happens by phone, I would make a file note and ask the dentist to confirm instructions in writing.
If the dentist pressures the laboratory to start, I would not begin. The laboratory would be manufacturing a medical device without a valid prescription and without the information needed to make it safe. I would say: 'I can book the work as soon as I have a signed prescription with the patient identifiers, shade, alloy and bite record. I cannot take the impression, and I cannot copy the old bridge without your current assessment.' If the pressure continues, I would escalate to the laboratory owner or manager and, if necessary, seek advice from the Dental Council or the laboratory's professional indemnity adviser.
The key point is that a busy dentist is not a justification for skipping the prescription. The patient's safety and the laboratory's legal position both depend on a proper written instruction.