Mediación en odontología y Garantías Explícitas en Salud en Chile 2005-2014: las diferencias entre el mundo privado y el público

Abstract

The later included mediation implemented and established as a preliminary procedure, mandatory, intended to avoid prosecution of cases of medical malpractice. This procedure involves two instances of mediation depending on public or private providers. objective: To describe the mediations arising from dental care in Chile. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study on mediatons since the implementation of this procedure (2005) until 2014, by dental benefits granted by both public and private providers. results: During the study period, 519 mediations were performed in the dental field. The majority (60.4%) of complaints in public context are women. Specialties or more committed dental services, data available only for private mediations, are endodontics (25%), implantology (16%) and prosthetics (15%). 58% of private and only 34% of public mediatons end up with full agreement between the parties, with difficulties to compare the two systems due to the wide variation in data collection. Among public averages, a high percentage of claimants (70%) only request explanations/apologize and/or health benefits and do not economic compensation. conclusion: claimants are mostly women, the most compromised dental specialties are endodontics, implants and prostheses, and most patients request only apologies/explanations about the facts and provided dental healthcare. The public and private mediations are not entirely comparable since data sources are dissimilar and contain partial information, so it is not possible to conclude about their differences.