ComplaintsforValley Dentists of Belchertown

• Initial Complaint

  08/17/2021

  Complaint Type:

  Product Issues

  Status:

  Resolved

  More info

  I had a cleaning at Valley Dentist(VD) on 6/14/21. VD told me: 10 fillings urgently needed to be repaired. Start the process of getting an implant for one of my front teeth that has a short root. VD did 4 of the fillings on 7/8/21 - Extremely painful & dentist and hygienist were arguing while working in my mouth. Had to go back because I couldn't chew correctly following the fillings. 1 mo later I was still having pain in the teeth fillings, VD said I would need a root canal. I was scheduled to go back and have the remaining six fillings repaired. However, I was hesitant to do so without a second, I went for a second opinion(SOD). At the SOD I was told: The 6 remaining teeth did not need replacement fillings. Short root is not a big deal. No Implant necessary. Advised the enamel has worn off on the teeth that VD filled which was causing pain. VD said these need a root canal. VD scammed me out of the $1160 I paid for unnecessary fillings, potential $7000 for an implant.

  Business response

  09/03/2021

  Business Response /* (1000, 8, 2021/08/20) */ We are disheartened that your experience at our office was so upsetting. We prepared for your visit, with attention to concerns you expressed regarding anxiety. We hoped you would feel comfortable and and supported. We are open and committed to reviewing your complaint, all of your interactions with our office, as well as what you have conveyed regarding a second opinion from another dental provider. In fairness to discussion and in order to consider a resolution, please forward the evaluation records, chart notes, any radiographs from the second dentist so that we can continue this process. Consumer Response /* (3000, 10, 2021/08/20) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) I do not want to disclose the information from the second opinion to your office. The new office has not done anything wrong and I do not want to get them involved in this case. They used the radiographs from your office and just took a repeat one of the left and right side. Your prompt attention a refund would be greatly appreciated. Business Response /* (4000, 19, 2021/09/02) */ The patient had 3 visits in our office, an initial exam/diagnostics, cleaning and radiographs on June 14, 2021, dental fillings on the upper left, July 7, then an occlusal adjustment, July 14th. At the initial visit the patient was seen by both the hygienist and the dentist, a full set of x-rays were taken and teeth were probed. Decay was evident in both upper maxillary posteriors, evident on the radiographs, right and left side. Interproximal decay was also noted between 19 and 20, lower left. At the initial visit, the dentist indicated internal root resorption happening on #10 (front tooth), made a small drawing of 3mm root structure, and recommended the patient see a specialist. The dentist expressed concern for the long term prognosis of this tooth. The patient was treatment planned fillings for the upper left, 4 teeth. The patient expressed anxiety about restorative procedures. The dentist suggested ****** as a way to make the experience less stressful, more comfortable. The patient accepted the script, though we learned later they did not opt to take the ***** prior to the dental filling visit on July 7th. The dental fillings were scheduled for 8 am. On that morning the Dental Assistant called in to say she believed she was exposed to COVID, The Dental Assistant was told not to come to work until negative testing was established. Knowing the restorative patient had anxiety regarding this appointment, the dentist opted to use the Hygienist as his Assistant, and we cancelled the first two hygiene patients of the morning, so that the Hygienist could provide support to this patient and dentist without interruption. Our goal was to provide an efficient, supportive visit for this patient. The clinical visit lasted approximately 85 minutes. The office reached out to the patient approximately 4 days later to inquire how she was doing. The patient reported that the filling surface felt rough. She said she felt some soreness. Patient was told she could come in at any time to have a surface smoothed out or for a bite adjustment. Occlusal adjustment is a normal sequelae after anesthesia has been administered to the mouth. It is a quick visit, and the office does not charge for this appointment. Patient came in on July 14th visit for occlusal adjustment, The dental assistant/ dentist explained that post - restorative sensitivity is to be somewhat expected, it gets better with time, but would continue to monitor her discomfort. There was no charge for this visit. Regarding the patient's claim that our office treatment planned for root canal (no tooth number mentioned from the patient), the record does not support this claim. At no point in the 3 appointments did the dentist diagnose pulpitis/abcess, or treatment plan a root canal with this patient. Diagnostics for root canal treatment were never performed, nor was the patient ever scheduled for a root canal. If the patient presented with criteria of needing a root canal, the dentist would have performed the standard protocol of percussion testing and pulp vitality testing, as well as provided an informed consent document to the patient, as is our standard procedure for every patient treatment planned for root canal. None of these events occurred. Regarding the claim regarding treatment plan for implant, it needs to be emphasized that he patient was referred to a specialist for Consult, evaluate tooth number 10. The radiograph taken in our office on June 24th demonstrates root reabsorption. This was shown and explained to the patient. The patient was not treatment planned for an implant. Our office does not place implants, nor quotes fees for implants, nor receives revenue for implants. The patient was referred to a specialist. Our office expressed no urgency about the referral. If we had felt treatment was urgently needed, we would have established an immediate appointment for the patient with the specialist. We respect the opinion of the second dentist, much of what confers with observations from our dental office. The second dentist took their own radiographs. In the examination of the upper left, the second dentist is evaluating patient complaint of sensitivity post restoration. As they are evaluating the teeth post restoration, it is assumed the second dentist would be using their own recent radiographs of August 11th as the basis of clinical impression, "pat has large fillings on these teeth, and do not see any decay or reason to have them replaced." This dental office stands behind its clinical findings from the new patient visit/clinical examination on June 14th. This dentist is available for further review, and to go over the radiographs with the patient in a setting and manner which is non-adversarial. It needs to be noted that this patient did not carry dental insurance, and paid the full fee for dental restorations. Insured patients pay at discounted rates. Our office accepts heavily discounted rates, including Medicaid/Mass Health rates. We also offer a dental membership which would provides 15% discount on the fees, and provides all preventative and diagnostic twice per year for the annual fee. We would have accepted payment at a much lesser fee had the patient presented with insurance. The patient paid a usual and customary rate for 4 multi-surface posterior composites. We understand the stress that goes with paying for dentistry out of pocket. That said, our practice places a high value on providing affordable dentistry. In good faith, we are willing to extend to the patient payment of $300, so the patient is not incurring dental services outside of their financial reach. Consumer Response /* (2000, 21, 2021/09/02) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) Please send a check to my home address. I was hoping for at least half which would have been $600, but I will accept the $300. Thanks, ********

*Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business. ↩