Should a prosthesis without further crack between two fasteners, snap-fasteners

13. January 2010  
Filed in Treatment, Complaints


My mother-in-law got about 3 years ago made the snap fasteners in its tandprotese of a dentist. in order to solve the problem with a loose prosthesis. The problem was that the gummen were disappearing(my mother-in-law is 82 years of age) the Work was made for a price of 30000 kr. She has since had the snap locks on the switch twice, which she had not been informed about. However, there are now done it to the prosthesis is broken between the two snap fasteners. It was reparetet two weeks ago(for the 900). and is now broken again. The question is whether a prosthesis such without further should be able to break and the treating dentist should be informed about the risk of it, and is there a warranty on the original work. My mother-in-law got to know that there was a lifetime warranty on the work performed to 30000. What can we do to help her?



Dear Steen,

It suggests communication deficits in your case. As a starting point, there is no guarantee on dental work, but you always have the option to lodge a complaint.

Read the evs. more about complaint about dental treatment or dentist

Regarding prosthesis, it is too specific to comment on, since you have to see the patient and give a professional assessment from it.

Hope you can use my answer.

With kind regards

Dentist Joan Olsen™ – the Road to healthier teeth


Questions answered by the dentist can be posted on the portal in anonymous form. However, we can not guarantee answers to all the questions and answers from the dentist can never replace dialogue or consultation with a private doctor. A reply through the letterbox must be seen as informational material.

Terms of use:

Patientforsikring convicted for speech about drug

4. december 2009  
Filed in News

Tandlægeforeningens Patientforsikring has today been ordered to pay CMS Dental € 2.5 million. kr. in damages.

Judgment in a case concerning an article in the Tandlægebladet from 2005. In the article advised the president of the Tandlægeforeningens Patientforsikring dentists to be careful when they used the 4 % articaïne for anesthesia in the lower jaw.

The judgment clarifies, not whether there is greater risk by using the articaïne than by using other anesthetics for anaesthesia in the mandible.

Tandlægeforeningens Patientforsikring take the judgment into account.

The president of the Tandlægeforeningens Patientforsikring, dentist Jahn Legarth, said:

– When I was invited to write the article to Tandlægebladet, there were previously been written in the magazine about the articaïne. Lægemiddelforsikringen was oriented and thus there was also passed information to the Danish medicines agency, which has responsibility for the safety of medicines. I don't know what I would have done, if I in advance had known that the article would lead to a lawsuit, which has had high personal costs for me.

Tandlægeforeningens president Susanne Andersen says:

The judgment contains some scary prospects. It will be important for us, for the medical associations and other health organizations. We are concerned that the high court's judgment will be perceived as a restriction of freedom of expression in the medical debate on the possible adverse effects of medicines. The judgment does not change that it is the individual dentist's duty to advise his patients in the best way possible and to report side effects to the Danish medicines agency.

Tandlægeforeningens Patientforsikring has not yet taken a position on whether the judgment should be appealed.

Tandlægeforeningen and Tandlægeforeningens Patientforsikring have no further comments on the judgment.