State Board of Dentistry Report Meeting Summary – September 9, 2022

Dr. Casey welcomed all attendees. The minutes were reviewed and approved unanimously.

Prosecutorial Report

  • Case #1: Case involved a forged EFDA license. A cease and desist was issued, and further violation would receive a $10,000 civil penalty. The penalty was rejected as too lenient.
  • Case #2: Case was not presented and tabled until more information could be provided to the board.
  • Case #3: Case was withdrawn and removed from the agenda.
  • Case #4: Case had abstentions, as it was previously heard by the Probable Case Committee. It involved an EFDA who was required for mental and physical evaluation after an arrest for opioid use. The consent agreement required a three-year monitoring period and enrollment in a treatment program. No cost was assessed, as the prosecutor noted that the licensee could not afford it and would be set up to fail. The consent agreement was approved.
  • Case #5: Case involved a dentist who had an assault case in 1996, and more recently had criminal charges for sexual assault, and was charged with introducing inappropriate relationships with patients and employees. The licensee voluntarily surrendered their license and the case was approved by the board.
  • Case #6: Case involved a dentist who had patient complaints for perforations during root canals. Upon inspection, the licensee utilized Sargenti paste, which can cause nerve damage if introduced into the blood. Consulted experts noted that Sargenti paste is no longer used and does not meet the standard of care. The civil penalty, costs, and CE requirements on restorative were rejected as being too lenient.
  • Case #7: Case involved a dentist who is a sole practitioner with no employees. In October 2020, a pediatric patient and caregiver observed a pornographic image on an office PC which was left visible to patients. Upon inspection, BEI noted that spore testing was performed. The licensee received a two-year suspension, with a 30-day active suspension, including CE requirements on ethics and infection control. The board rejected the penalty as too lenient.
  • Case #8: Case involved a dentist dually licensed in Texas. In 2019, the licensee was cited for failing to properly administer and monitor anesthesia. The dentist took the required CE as part of the Texas citation. A civil penalty and public reprimand was administered in Pennsylvania. The penalty was adopted.

Regulatory Action

The SBOD requirements discussed the requirement for ADEX, CRDTS, and SRTA licensing examinations to complete certain portions on live patients. The board moved to allow these portions of the exam to be completed on approved Manikin artificial teeth and gingiva. The motion was approved for all exams.