In July 2022, the GDC released its Annual Report 2021, which included a summary of the Fitness to Practise performance of the GDC. The GDC, the regulator for dental professionals, has the duty to investigate and assess any concerns raised to them and to consider whether action needs to take place on a dental professional’s registration with the GDC.

The GDC stated in its Annual Report that it received 1,349 new concerns in 2021, which was a 19% increase in the level of complaints compared to 2020. When a new complaint is provided to the GDC under Rule 3 of the General Dental Council’s (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2006, the registrar will consider the complaint and determine whether the complaint amounts to an allegation. If the registrar concludes it does so, then Rule 4 of the General Dental Council’s (Fitness to Practise) Rules 2006 is engaged. If the Rule 4 threshold is passed, the GDC will provide the dental professional with a summary of the allegation (s) and any documentation relating to the allegation (s) and give a period to respond. The GDC Case Examiners will then decide whether to close the case with no further action, to close the case but to issue either advice or a warning, to offer undertakings, or to refer a case to a GDC Practice Committee.

GDC Standards

In 2021 GDC Case Examiners made 304 decisions. The GDC reported that this was a 33% decrease in decisions compared to 2020. The GDC stated this is related to resourcing issues it discusses in its Annual Report and that the GDC has taken steps to increase its workforce. The Professional Standards Authority published its report in April 2022 for the period 2020/21, which found that the GDC did not meet Standard 15 regarding a timely resolution of Fitness to Practise cases. The GDC has agreed that the Fitness to Practise cases often take too long to resolve.

During the GDC’s review, it found following a Case Examiners review, 10.5% of the total cases were closed with no further action, and 13.5% were closed with either advice, warning, or undertakings. On average, in 2021, out of every 100 cases received by the GDC for review by initial assessment, only 19 progressed to a GDC Practice Committee hearing. Out of those 19 cases, the GDC Practice Committee heard, 14 resulted in sanctions, and 5 resulted in no further action. The GDC reported that Case Examiner referrals to GDC Practice Committees decreased by 23% compared to 2020.

GDC Practice Committee

If a case is referred to a GDC Practice Committee, there are three different Committees that your case could be referred to; Professional Conduct Committee, Professional Performance Committee, or the Health Committee. A Professional Conduct Committee will decide whether allegations referred to it amount to misconduct, if this misconduct means a registrant’s ability to practise is impaired and if restrictions need to be imposed upon their registration. A Professional Performance Committee assesses whether a dental professional’s performance is deficient and if this deficiency amounts to an impairment of their Fitness to Practise. A Health Committee will consider cases where a dental professional’s ability to practise is affected by physical or mental health condition (s).

Aside from the Health Committee, who has less restrictive powers on a dental professional’s registration, a Practice Committee can:

  • Conclude that the registrant’s Fitness to Practise is not impaired and close the case
  • Issue a reprimand (which is similar to a warning)
  • Impose conditions for up to 36 months (with or without a review).
  • Suspend a registration for up to 12 months (with or without a review).
  • Erase the registrant from the Dental Register.

The GDC reported that in 2021 15% of Practice Committee hearings resulted in erasure, 30% resulted in suspension, 10% resulted in conditions, and 5% resulted in the issue of a reprimand. It was reported that 1% of cases referred to a Practice Committee resulted in no case to answer. The GDC also considered where cases were concluded, and no sanctions were imposed. It identified that 16% of cases concluded where Fitness to Practise was found not impaired, and 6% of cases were closed where the facts found proven did not amount to misconduct.

This indicates that if a matter is referred to a Practice Committee, some form of sanction will be imposed upon a dental professional’s registration. We would recommend any dental professional who is the subject of GDC Fitness to Practise proceedings to speak to their indemnifiers and seek legal advice.

GDC Lawyer

If you have had a complaint raised against you to the GDC or you are in the process of GDC Fitness to Practise proceedings, then please do not hesitate to contact Richard Creamer or Lily Rose Lloyd from our Healthcare Regulatory department at 01483 451 900 or email directly to richard@gordonsols.co.uk or lily@gordonsols.co.uk.

About the Author

Lily Rose Lloyd
Associate

 

 

 

 

 

For more about interim orders, Larissa Glass has recently written an article on GMC Orders and their practical impact and Susan Hunneyball recently featured in Chemist + Druggist discussing interim orders for pharmacy professionals, including what to do if issued with one.