HI6006 Competitive Strategy Editing Service
Delivery in day(s): 4
Australia safety law and health is being governed by specific regulations and frameworks which cover all the fields from practice of work to the standards that should be met. The main purpose of these laws and regulations is to ensure the safety and health of all the people in these institutions. With this laws and regulations in place, it has led to the establishment of health and safety legislation workplace in every territory or state that prescribes the specific obligation of both employees and employers. Risk assessments should always be carried out for all the situations and cases where there are potentials for blood exposure or even other potential materials which are infectious and at some cases injury. Once the risk has been identified, its management should follow specific hierarchy that is found in the control and regulations of work health and safety. According to the common law, an injured member of staff may succeed on suing for the damages incurred if there is a clear evidence that there was a negligence in the employers part. In the criminal law, there are also specific charges for manslaughter in cases of neglect which resulted in death (Hoff et al, 2008).
In the dental clinics, there are a lot of risks due to the overall exposure of staff to the hazards in workplace which require highest attention and priority. The most common effect caused by this hazards is the occupational skin disease which affects more than eighty percent of the dental staff and even though it is not life threatening, it has become one of the greatest concern. With the many hazards in the dental workplaces, it has led to the limitation of working hours among the employees. Some of the controllable hazards in dental offices are cuts, skin penetration injuries, assaults, fire, extreme cold and heat and the manual handling of people (Villa & Abati, 2011). The major concerns are hazards caused by machine and the exposure in the dental offices. These hazards include kinetic energy from projectiles, thermal energy from splashes and spills, radiation from X-rays, electrical engineering and hazardous chemicals.
Among these hazards, the lowest risk usually come from sound which might damage the ears. This is due to the improvement and use of modern equipment which have controlled noise levels. This is one of the greatest achievement in risks management in these dental offices according to the hearing protection and sound level regulation ( Armfield & Heaton, 2013)
To manage some of the risks such as cuts, impact injury, bumping, trips and spillage, the work place should be well designed. Workplace should be designed in such a way that there are no or minimal sharp cabinets and corners which may cause cuts and injury. Items and equipment should be stored in areas that are easily accessible and heavy items should not be stored on high shelves. Wet floors due to spillage should be attended to immediately by the dentists or concerned staff. Floor management is also a concern as holes, cables and electrical switches creates a risk of trip and falling thus causing injury and even destruction and lose of equipment’s. The dental offices should have good and proper lighting with adequate ventilation. The rooms should neither be too cold or too hot. Workplace should also have the correct number of people to avoid congestion and limited accessibility. To minimize these risks, unsafe and substandard practices such as working with inadequate training, use of wrong equipment and taking short cuts should be avoided at all costs.
The main reason for the cause of the many accidents and incidents in the dental offices is management failures. With proper management of risk in place, human error, unsafe practices and conditions would be minimal or even non-existing. Identification and quick action on these factors is the management concern and should be fast to identify and promptly address them. The general hierarchy of risk management is first identifying the risk. Once the risk is identified it is assessed to consider its exposure level and the possible consequences that may come out of it. These factors are considered and the risk score is given, whether high, low or moderate so that its control measure is given and applied immediately. With all these steps being followed carefully, risk in the dental workplace would have been minimized and some being completely taken out.
This procedures are however complex or difficult at times for dental practitioners managements and owners to follow step by step and so the Australian government have come up with legal and ethical regulations that must be followed (Holtzman et al, 2014). These regulations put in place concerns from sterilization, lighting, floors, ventilation, radiation, electricity and the working areas. When all these procedures are followed a general walkthrough and inspection is important to ensure all the guidelines and legislations are followed to the latter. In accordance to these, all the staffs of dental practices in Australia must commit to health and safety policy. This policy states that dental practitioners must commit to ethics and work to achieve policy of occupational health and maintaining safety (Featherstone et al 2012).
In Australia, workers compensation insurance is compulsory in all the states. The difference comes about in different states whose legislation and scheme operations vary from each other. In states such as Western Australia, Tasmania, Northern territory and ACT, there is a privatization system which allows the insurers to give their own rates and structures for dental staff to choose from. Other states including Queensland, government system is put in place to run the rates of insurance and compensation. All dental clinics employers must have covers for all their workers which holds their compensation. These covers however differ from state to state and employees work arrangement, full-time, casual and part-time (Atchison et al, 2010). For non-compliance to these policies, serious penalties are often given so as to ensure the right and correct set-ups.
There are some cases of dental negligence by the dentists which lead to claims of compensation. Dental negligence may at times endanger one’s life and even worsen a person existing condition.
Dental staff must always be competent while diagnosing patients and must meet the requirement standards. A breach to these laws and regulations lead to an eligible claim (Dietz et al, 2008).For a successful claim to dental negligence, there must have been a breach that led to loss, damage and injury or must have been negligence due to duties. At some case where a patient is not fully satisfied with the outcome of the procedure, he or she might not necessarily file for a claim. Another case is where there was a reasonable mistake by the medical practitioner. This is where a the dental staff provides acceptable reasons for the standards they practiced their work.
In recent years, there have been increase in the rise of workers who apply for compensation due to work related injury. This also applies to the dental of staff, who have continued to increase their compensation claims. However, a third of those who file these claims normally receive compensation while the rest do not, due to some reasons (Wigen, Skaret & Wang, 2009). Majority of these dental workers who make claims for compensation often take time off so as to fasten there compensation procedure. This is because there will be fewer workers due to workload and thus giving the dental institution a burden and the need for dental staff who are on off-work to recover and come back quickly.
Statistics on this compensation showed that majority of these dental staff who asked for compensation are male compared to their female counter parts who felt that their injuries were minor to claim for. For compensation to be put into action there are various things that are considered such as the magnitude of the injury, recovery, time lost by the staff and the type of injury caused whether serious or minor ( Andersson et al 2012).
Compensation system in Australia usually benefits the agency and the employee. Active and early handling of injury usually assist the dental staff to return to work sooner. They usually involve a number of stages from first aids, all the medical treatment and return to work policies such as modification, adjustment in accommodation and allocation of duties. Employers are also advised on how to prepare suitable work routine for the recovering practitioners and in advanced cases employers cater for workers rehabilitation where necessary (Jokic et al, 2009).
In Queensland, complaints that concern health practitioners such as the dental staff are often referred to a tribunal body. This tribunal is the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal. The health ombudsman office is an independent body that is structured for handling complaints that are related to health service providers. This system is mostly designed to ensure that the health practitioners are accountable for their work to the public relation and are able to maintain the confidence of that is needed in the health system. When one is not satisfied with the health service received for either oneself or family, one is entitled to make a complain through this body ( O’donnell et al, 2011).
The first step while bringing a medical negligence compensation claim is by lodging a complaint normally done with the health ombudsman. A formal complain about either registered or unregistered medical practitioner such as dentists can be done by anybody. Complains can be about diagnosis, treatment, inappropriate behavior and handling. Before going to lodge a complaint, the best thing to do is to fast resolve the problem with the health practitioner. Communicating with them directly is good to help fix the problem and if it fails then one can proceed to file a complaint (Halvari et al 2010). A complain is normally lodged with health ombudsman directly in person. One should have all the key information at hand. These information include contact details supporting documentation and notes on the outcome one would like. After lodging a complaint, the health ombudsman assesses then investigates the complaint.
The ombudsman gathers the right information and analyze the necessary information in your matter. They will also listen to the health practitioners version. At some cases the health ombudsman will seek opinions from an independent medical practitioner. From all these the ombudsman will handle the matter so as to facilitate resolution between the two conflicting parties. If the health practitioner gives states the right reasons and evidence for the work done, then the ombudsman closes the matter. When the complaint is not happy with the verdict he or she may proceed to take legal action through a lawyer.
In Australia dental healthcare criminal law majorly concerns the views in the prevailing society to what are accepted and what are not. They apply to all contexts whether professional or personal for the intention of protection of the public from practices which are not accepted and allowed by law (Roberts et al, 2011). In Australia, it is well understood that a person who is an adult and has got a sound mind, has the right to determine what should and should not be done on his or her body. A patient must consent to what is supposed to be done on his body and the patients demands are to be treated delicately. Health practitioners who may handle the patient recklessly and render the treatment without the patient’s full consent are constituted to trespass.
At some cases, the mistakes are not intentional but this is not an excuse for defending ones mistake.
There is also consent between the medical practitioner and the patient which is usually followed so as to avoid various disagreements. This consent often covers risks ,failures and success that might be encountered while undergoing medication. Proposed treatments, consequences and costs are often discussed here (Tulip & Palmer, 2008).
A serious case usually arise where there is criminal assault. This usual come up as a result of reckless threats and the use of force on patients.
There is need for clear communication between the health practitioner and the patient. In some case such as brain trauma due to dental treatment, the dental staff normal seeks defenses. Dental staffs and clinics are strongly advised to first engage their patients in a conversation about their dental health including risks, failures and successes. Dental practice should show safety and quality processes and systems by putting all the requirements into place. In Australia, dental health services are being treated with great care. To many, access to affordable and quality dental healthcare has become elusive. Australians normally meet their own dental medication and should therefore take into great consideration for the good and well-being of all. IT is however difficult to overstate all the importance of oral and dental hygiene and services.
1. Andersson, L., Andreasen, J.O., Day, P., Heithersay, G., Trope, M., DiAngelis, A.J., Kenny, D.J., Sigurdsson, A., Bourguignon, C., Flores, M.T. and Hicks, M.L., 2012. International Association of Dental Traumatology guidelines for the management of traumatic dental injuries: 2. Avulsion of permanent teeth. Dental Traumatology, 28(2), pp.88-96.
2. Armfield, J.M. and Heaton, L.J., 2013. Management of fear and anxiety in the dental clinic: a review. Australian dental journal, 58(4), pp.390-407.
3. Atchison, K.A., Gironda, M.W., Messadi, D. and Der?Martirosian, C., 2010. Screening for oral health literacy in an urban dental clinic. Journal of public health dentistry, 70(4), pp.269-275.
4. Dietz, C.A., Ablah, E., Reznik, D. and Robbins, D.K., 2008. Patients' attitudes about rapid oral HIV screening in an urban, free dental clinic. AIDS patient care and STDs, 22(3), pp.205-212.
5. Featherstone, J.D.B., White, J.M., Hoover, C.I., Rapozo-Hilo, M., Weintraub, J.A., Wilson, R.S., Zhan, L. and Gansky, S.A., 2012. A randomized clinical trial of anticaries therapies targeted according to risk assessment (caries management by risk assessment). Caries research, 46(2), pp.118-129.
6. Halvari, A.E.M., Halvari, H., Bjørnebekk, G. and Deci, E.L., 2010. Motivation and anxiety for dental treatment: Testing a self-determination theory model of oral self-care behaviour and dental clinic attendance. Motivation and Emotion, 34(1), pp.15-33.
7. Hoff, A.O., Toth, B.B., Altundag, K., Johnson, M.M., Warneke, C.L., Hu, M., Nooka, A., Sayegh, G., Guarneri, V., Desrouleaux, K. and Cui, J., 2008. Frequency and risk factors associated with osteonecrosis of the jaw in cancer patients treated with intravenous bisphosphonates. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 23(6), pp.826-836.
8. Holtzman, J.S., Atchison, K.A., Gironda, M.W., Radbod, R. and Gornbein, J., 2014. The association between oral health literacy and failed appointments in adults attending a university?based general dental clinic. Community dentistry and oral epidemiology, 42(3), pp.263-270.
9. Jokic, N.I., Bakarcic, D., Fugosic, V., Majstorovic, M. and Skrinjaric, I., 2009. Dental trauma in children and young adults visiting a University Dental Clinic. Dental traumatology, 25(1), pp.84-87.
10. O’donnell, M.J., Boyle, M.A., Russell, R.J. and Coleman, D.C., 2011. Management of dental unit waterline biofilms in the 21st century. Future microbiology, 6(10), pp.1209-1226.
11. Roberts, M.C., Soge, O.O., Horst, J.A., Ly, K.A. and Milgrom, P., 2011. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from dental school clinic surfaces and students. American journal of infection control, 39(8), pp.628-632.
12. Tulip, D.E. and Palmer, N.O.A., 2008. A retrospective investigation of the clinical management of patients attending an out of hours dental clinic in Merseyside under the new NHS dental contract. British dental journal, 205(12), p.659.
13. Villa, A. and Abati, S., 2011. Risk management factors and symptoms associated with xerostomia: a cross?sectional study. Australian dental journal, 56(3), pp.290-295.
14. Wigen, T.I., Skaret, E. and Wang, N.J., 2009. Dental avoidance behaviour in parent and child as risk indicators for caries in 5?year?old children. International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, 19(6), pp.431-437.