Dental news
Dentistry News | Dental Jobs | Dentist Forum | CPD Education

Dental news

RSS Feed View by: Most Recent | Most Popular | Most Discussed

UK's HIV dentists to practise again?

10th Aug 2011

Email this story
Email this story
  
Share this story
Digg it submit to reddit printer-friendly version

If you take a week's holiday away from the surgery, on the first day back to work you may well decide to arrive at the surgery a little earlier than usual in anticipation of a few things that you need to catch up with.

A little preparation before the first patient arrives can help prevent you from running late, while your adrenaline levels struggle to adjust from the relaxed holiday setting into something a little more energised.

The lapse of time
If you take a month off work, not only do you have a lot more to catch up with, but there may also be some aspects of previously planned treatment that you may feel less confident about tackling, deciding instead to reschedule them for another day; all the more so if you find an unfamiliar dental nurse has been allocated to assist you on your first day back.

'Dental students who are currently required to take an HIV test before starting their training can progress through their course without the fear that they might suddenly be forced to discard the time and money invested in tuition because of a momentary indiscretion'

Taking a career break to raise a family or to pursue other interests can leave the clinician even more insecure. Periods of a year or more which are spent away from clinical activity can result in significant de-skilling for any clinician and, consequently, a loss of confidence.

In the past, the Department of Health funded the Keep in Touch Scheme (KITS) in an effort to attract back-to-work female dentists who had left the profession to raise a family. The deaneries now operate a ‘get back to work' scheme that allows individual dentists to undertake training to support their own personal skills development.

Back to work
This is exactly the same situation that could soon be facing dentists and hygienists who stopped practising when they discovered they were HIV positive. 2012 may be the first time in almost 20 years that this group of individuals will not be subject to the precautionary guidance that took them away from their chosen careers – or at least the exposure-prone elements of dentistry which is almost everything apart from making full dentures and the examination of the edentulous mouth.

Why were these precautions required?

Most undergraduates entering dental schools this year were not yet born when, in 1990, the world witnessed the public demise of an American dental patient named Kimberly Bergalis. She was one of six dental patients believed to have been infected with HIV by a dentist (Dr David Acer) in Florida, who was known to have AIDS.

The facts surrounding this one and only presumptive transmission of HIV from a dentist to a patient have been the subject of an extended debate that has failed to establish the route of transmission in the six patients. Nor could any criminal intent be excluded on the part of the dentist.

Regulatory bodies in most countries responded to the extensive emotional coverage in the media in very different ways – some banned HIV-infected oral healthcare professionals (OHCP+) from working outright, others promulgated updated infection control guidelines. In the UK the government and its advisors opted for the ultimate precaution.

They decided to prohibit healthcare workers with HIV from undertaking procedures which were exposure-prone. Dentistry was placed in the same category as orthopaedic surgery because, during treatment, the tips of the fingers were not always in full view of the clinician to whom they were attached.

Advertisement

20 years' later
Apart from the case of Dr Acer, no other transmissions of HIV in the dental setting have been demonstrated.

The data available from patient notification exercises supports the conclusion that the overall risk of transmission of HIV from infected healthcare workers to patients is extremely low. Between 1988 and 2003 in the UK, there were 28 patient notification exercises. However, there was no detectable transmission of HIV from an infected healthcare worker to a patient, despite more than 7,000 patients having been tested.

Two major developments
Since the Acer case back in 1990, there have been two developments that would suggest that the precautionary response that had been adopted in the UK should now be reviewed:
• The advances in the medical management of HIV disease
• Significant improvements in infection control standards.
Combination antiretroviral therapy (HAART) introduced in 1995 successfully diminishes viral replication and can lead to undetectable levels of HIV in plasma. Indeed, studies have shown that HAART is sufficiently effective to protect (at least 96% of the time) an uninfected partner when having unprotected sex with a person who has been taking anti-retroviral medication to treat their underlying HIV status. As you will have probably realised, unprotected sex is a fairly efficient way of transmitting HIV (as is sharing needles) while dentistry is not effective.

Just recently, infection control standards in UK dental surgeries have been upgraded again with the universal adoption of HTM 01-05. In addition, the introduction of bodies like CQC – and its equivalent in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland – will provide a regular audit of those newly elevated infection control standards, thereby assuring the track record that has already been proven to successfully prevent transmission of blood-borne pathogens (in both directions, from patient to dentist and dentist to patient).

What next?
Any OHCP+ who withdrew from practice and is now interested in returning to work would be well advised to contact their defence organisation regarding registration with the GDC (if that has lapsed) and for support while organising a programme of skills development in conjunction with their local deanery.

In this way, the necessary CPD requirements can also be achieved. Dental students who are currently required to take an HIV test before starting their training can progress through their course without the fear that they might suddenly be forced to discard the time and money invested in tuition because of a momentary indiscretion.

Dentists can at last join the rest of mankind in seeing a diagnosis of HIV as a signal to concentrate on their health and the available treatment, rather than being confronted with the immediate end to their career, combined with an immediate loss of income that can only compound the stress produced by that same diagnosis.

So all together now, ‘Why are we waiting…?'



The following extract from Hansard during May 2011 confirms that the current regulations are set to change.

Lord Colwyn: ‘To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have received the report of the Tripartite Working Group established to review the current guidance on HIV-infected healthcare workers; whether they propose to publish it; and what steps they propose to take in relation to the guidance.' [HL9369]

The parliamentary under-secretary of state, Department of Health (Earl Howe): ‘Professor Dame Sally Davies, the government's chief medical officer, received the Tripartite Working Group's report on the management of HIV-infected healthcare workers on 20 April 2011. Officials are currently considering the report and will be providing advice to Ministers in due course.'

Even though the answer from Earl Howe is lacking in detail, it is likely we will see an announcement from the Department of Health on this subject in the near future, prior to a public consultation on the proposed changes in the management of the treatment provided by HIV-infected oral healthcare professionals (OHCP+).

Author

David Croser


David Croser was the clinical lead for the dental service dedicated to HIV patients in Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster. The service ran for 20 years and was part of the Community Dental Service. It now has general access. David is now the communications manager at Dental Protection.

Rate this story


Comments

As a currently GDC registered, HIV+ dentist who was forced to give up clinical practice just over three years ago, I wish to express my extreme gratitude to David Croser for campaigning so hard on this matter and keeping the issue of the plight of the UK's HIV+ dental professionals in the foreground and detailing the grossly unfair treatment that we have received because of our status.

My diagnosis at age 38 (incidentally NOT borne from a "momentary indiscretion" but from an 8 year long-term relationship with a partner who turned out to have occasional "momentary indiscretions" during our time together, unbeknown to me- a situation I'm sure that many of us will have had experience of regardless of our gender or sexuality) led not only to the loss of my job, but also my home and everything else that I had worked hard to build up over the years. Because of these appalling restrictions faced by HIV+ dentists, as David says, I did not only have to cope with getting used to my new health status, but also with financial ruin and homelessness as a direct result of these restrictions.

Thankfully, I am now through the other side of the trauma and devastation that my diagnosis resulted in. I am now just left completely livid that myself and others like me had to endure all of this simply because of having an HIV diagnosis. What I'm also extremely angry about is the complete lack of support offered to affected dentists to retrain or redeploy to an alternative career--what a complete and utter waste of talent and resources, not to mention completely against the spirit of the Disability Discrimination Act (now the Equality Act) that HIV is covered by from the point of diagnosis.

Being able to return to practice is welcome news and I'm sure that I speak for others similarly affected when I say that I want back what I lost so unfairly because of my HIV diagnosis.







--This post was last edited on 11/08/11 at 10:56--
Posted by allan.reid9@btopenworld.com 10/08/11 at 11:55
Good luck. I'm just very surprised someone hasn't taken the DoH 'to the cleaners' at the European Court over this already. How would m'learned fiends (not a typo ....) square the circle of us being unable to discriminate against an HIV+ve patient with the disgusting discrimination displayed against HIV+ve dentists?!!

--This post was last edited on 10/08/11 at 16:43--
Posted by docholliday 10/08/11 at 13:30
yeah, unfortunately when you lose your income you also tend you lose your ability to take such legal action...sadly, it's not like the Tom Hank's film, "Philadelphia"!

--This post was last edited on 10/08/11 at 13:40--
Posted by allan.reid9@btopenworld.com 10/08/11 at 13:34
None of them do 'no win no fee'? Excellent film that, BTW. IMHO.
Posted by docholliday 10/08/11 at 13:57
I doubt that HIV discrimination issues are seen as a worthwhile cause by most pro-bono lawyers IMO

--This post was last edited on 10/08/11 at 15:45--
Posted by allan.reid9@btopenworld.com 10/08/11 at 14:05
I sadly suspect you are right. They are probably too busy persuing dodgy motoring 'whiplash' claims and such like. Henry VI Part 2 'first kill all the lawyers'. The Bard may have had a good point there.

--This post was last edited on 10/08/11 at 14:53--
Posted by docholliday 10/08/11 at 14:46
True....or else the UKs human rights laywers are busy working instead on race and sex discrimination cases. Personally, I don't see much in the way of difference myself

--This post was last edited on 11/08/11 at 13:07--
Posted by allan.reid9@btopenworld.com 10/08/11 at 21:44
avatar placeholder
Allan.
I salute your courage in going public in a forum like this and wish you good luck.
I personally am more than happy to start raising a fund with the help of other colleagues to hekp you take legal action against this shameless act of discrimination by DOH and the GDC.
Posted by Expat 11/08/11 at 09:30
Gosh, Nick….I really appreciate your support and your extremely kind offer! However, I think that common sense and justice will prevail in the end with this matter whether there ends up being a discrimination case raised against the DoH or not. What I would like to see though is the whole profession coming together to support HIV+ dental professionals in their return to work with adequately funded re-training courses and jobs being available to us when this re-training is completed. Being allowed to work is only one step in the process; the HIV+ dentist will still face many challenges in securing decent jobs , particularly in general practice, where many principals will have prejudicial views and may not be willing to hire a dentist with HIV.

My own experiences of trying to secure a non-clinical role in dental public health after my diagnosis serve to highlight this; after the dust settled and with my GDC registration intact, I went along to my local Deanery of Dental Education to ask if I could be supported in my desire to re-train in dental public health, particularly appropriate I thought when I had just completed a self-funded Masters in Public Health after having to stop work. To my great disappointment, I was met with somewhat cold indifference with no real useful support offered. It was clear to me that as an HIV positive dentist, I wasn’t considered valid or worthy enough to continue dentistry even in a non-clinical capacity, despite working for 17 years full time general practice in some of the most deprived areas of the country. I recall the case of a Scottish colleague a few years ago whose clinical career was cut short because of her developing arthritis in her hands. She was given full support and immediately deployed into public health training. However, in my case, it was clear that HIV was treated much differently from other disabilities such as arthritis. That is unfair and unjust in my opinion and it is this that needs to be fought hard against. HIV+ dentists may well get the go ahead to work, but with discriminatory attitudes displayed by even the highest academics in our profession, what chance have we got getting jobs with ordinary high street dentists?


--This post was last edited on 12/08/11 at 17:50--
Posted by allan.reid9@btopenworld.com 12/08/11 at 08:27
Allan, not only do I salute you sir, but I think your attitude is frankly amazing. I would be in the garden shed manufacturing WMD's if your problems had chanced upon me. The only thing I would add is 'is anyone surprised by the attitude of these so-called 'highest academics in the country''? After all, these are the 'geniuses' who the likes of Bazza Cockcroft are relying upon to set up a new 'nirvana' of a contract........... (oh dear...... didn't Kurt Kobain blow his head off with a 12-bore?.......) ....
Posted by docholliday 13/08/11 at 20:36
avatar placeholder
Dear Allan,
You are very welcome. I am very sorry to hear about your experience and the way you have been treated by these so called "Academics" and "colleagues". It shows the level of ignorance about HIV as a chronic condition and the level of prejudice. It is amazing that healt care professsionals who are supposed to have the knowledge are acting this way. If we are treating our colleagues this way , what do we expect of the General public?
This again shows how weak and irrelevant the BDA has become, if they can not start a campaign voicing the concern of affected colleagues. I wish you all the best and good luck.
Posted by Expat 13/08/11 at 21:44
Please log-in to post comments or register here.



Search
Members' Area
Remember me    Register free | Forgotten password

What are we electing?
The DH may well say 'Who do I call if I want to speak to the BDA?'
View all blogs

Advertisement