Does providing “Compromised treatment” equate to “Compromised care” or could it be considered “Appropriatech”?

Teeth are sensory structures that play a part in many different aspects of a patient’s life, including mastication, speech, smiling and aesthetics. As such they can affect both their functional and psychosocial wellbeing and quality of life. Unfortunately, these vital components can be lost due to caries, periodontal disease, dental trauma or iatrogenic damage. Dental practitioners should aim to provide treatment that will save and/or restore compromised or diseased teeth whenever possible. This may include direct or indirect restorations, endodontics, periodontal therapy and even reimplantation or autotransplantation in specific cases.1 Despite the wide range of treatment possibilities, oral rehabilitation is often not available, accessible or affordable to all patients.2 To try to “provide treatment for the many”, cost-effective procedures may need to be considered. However, this cost-cutting cannot be achieved by “ignoring sound prosthodontic principles” and needs to have some form of quality control.2 This paper will give a brief review of the controversial cervical margin relocation technique. It will then use this as an example for how a clinician can debate whether the provision of “compromised treatment” equates to inferior care, or if it could be considered appropriate for the given situation. They need to also ensure that the chosen treatment is safe, adheres to evidence-based principles and still provides quality of care

Looking beyond the physical management of patients with head and neck cancer

Cancers of the head and neck region often leave patients with conspicuous defects, as well as limitations in physical and psycho-social functions. Rehabilitation is challenging and can never fully restore the anatomical, physiological, or functional characteristics that have been lost. Ideally newly diagnosed cancer patients should be managed by a multidisciplinary team of specialists from various allied fields who will be able to educate them and help them decide on the most appropriate and suitable treatment options. Patients must understand the processes, be of possible side effects and comprehend the limitations aware of rehabilitation. At the same time, clinicians may need to consider issues of distributive justice when deciding which patients will receive which resources, especially in financially limited institutions and countries. The biggest challenge to us as clinicians as well as community members is to try and treat all patients holistically and to address both their physical and psychosocial needs. This requires a fervent commitment to action, and that we all stand together and help each other through difficult times