Open Access Short Communication

Prognathism and Skeletal Class II-Definition from Dental Council of Hong Kong

Cecilia Young*

Independent Researcher, UK

Corresponding Author

Received Date: October 07, 2022;  Published Date: October 27, 2022

Abstract

Prognathism means protrusion of one or both jaws. The Judgement of Dental Council in Hong Kong stated that “prognathicmeans the mandible is in front of the maxilla. This is a fundamental concept in dentistry, and such a fundamental mistake reflects the poor understanding of the Defendant in dental knowledge. The victim dentist needs to think about whether to disclose the lack of knowledge and systemic problem in Hong Kong when he submits the certificate of standing to Dental Councils in other countries.

Introduction

Prognathism means protrusion of one or both jaws [1-5]. The Maxillary and mandibular position can be normal, prognathic or retrognathic [6]. Skeletal class II related to prognathic maxilla or retrognathic mandible are mentioned in many studies [6-14].

Clinicians conduct extra-oral and intra-oral examination plus the Cephalometric Analysis to make the diagnosis, most of them put prognathic maxilla; retrognathic mandible or both in their diagnosis. However, in a judgement in 2008 from Hong Kong Dental Council mentioned that “most significantly, the diagnosis in the orthodontic file was “mild skeletal Class II prognathic malocclusion with convex profile and high mandibular plane angle.” This could not be a typographical mistake, as it was repeated twice in the file in different pages. The term “skeletal Class II prognathic” is intrincally contradictory, as “skeletal Class II” means the maxilla is in front of the mandible, whereas “prognathic” means the mandible is in front of the maxilla. This is a fundamental concept in dentistry, and such a fundamental mistake reflects the poor understanding of the Defendant in dental knowledge Figure 1 [15].

irispublishers-openaccess-dentistry-oral-health

The disciplinary action of any registered dentist is held by the Dental Council of Hong Kong [16], which is established under the Chapter 156, “Dentist Registration Ordinance” [17], no one oversees the Dental Council of Hong Kong. The reporters wrote the news based on the judgement also did not understand dentistry, general public read the news, so everyone was misled. The only one knew the fundamental knowledge in this case was convicted.

Appeal and Judicial Review cannot overturn questions in dental knowledge since the judges do not possess any dental knowledge and this is not the job of the judges in the corresponding courts.

An appeal is a fundamental premise of many legal systems that appellate courts review questions of law de novo, but appellate courts do not conduct independent fact-finding [18]. Under the judicial review procedure, judges examine (or “review”) the decision being challenged in the claim, and consider whether the law has been correctly followed by the public body. As well as the claimant (who seeks to change the decision) and the defendant (who has made the decision), other parties who want to be involved in the case -because they are concerned that they will be affected by the outcome-may be able to intervene [19].

Composition of the Dental Council [17]

(2) The Council shall consist of-

(a) the Registrar

(b) a consultant dental surgeon of the Dental Service of the Department of Health appointed by the Chief Executive; a registered dentist, who is a full-time member of the teaching staff of the Faculty of Dentistry of the University of Hong Kong, nominated by the University of Hong Kong and appointed by the Chief Executive

(c) 2 medical practitioners appointed by the Chief Executive;

(d) 6 registered dentists qualified to be registered under section 8 and appointed by the Chief Executive

(i) from a panel of not less than 12 such registered dentists nominated by the Hong Kong Dental Association; or

(ii) in the event of the Hong Kong Dental Association failing to nominate at least 12 such registered dentists, at the discretion of the Chief Executive

(e) one lay member who shall be appointed by the Chief Executive

The Department of Justice represents the Dental Council of Hong Kong, so even the victim dentist claim for civil case for negligence, those civil servants of the above composition use the tax payer’s money to defend for their lack of knowledge.

The panel of the dental council wrote the judgements with fundamental flaw and convicted a dentist with proper knowledge, it further harmed the victim dentist since he should report this to other countries that he registered. Other countries also require the certificate of good standing in new registration, renewal or restoration, the Dental Council of Hong Kong simply insisted their judgement and mentioned the victim dentist was convicted and repeated the charges.

Australian council of Professions defines a “profession” as: A Profession is a disciplined group of individuals who adhere to ethical standards and who hold themselves out as, and are accepted by the public as possessing special knowledge and skills in a widely recognized body of learning derived from research, education and training at a high level, and who are prepared to apply this knowledge and exercise these skills in the interests of others.

It is inherent in the definition of a Profession that a code of ethics governs the activities of each Profession. Such codes require behaviour and practice beyond the personal moral obligations of an individual. They define and demand high standards of behaviour in respect to the services provided to the public and in dealing with professional colleagues. Often these codes are enforced by the Profession and are acknowledged and accepted by the community [20].

The victim dentist needs to think about whether to disclose such lack of knowledge and systemic problem in Hong Kong when he submits the certificate of standing to Dental Councils in other countries. We need to think about this problem as a member of the dental community.

Acknowledgement

None.

Declaration of Interest

The author is a registered dentist and the Editor-in-Chief of this journal.

References

  1. Prognathism. (n.d.) Miller-Keane Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Medicine, Nursing, and Allied Health, (7th Edn.) (2003).
  2. Prognathism. (n.d.) Farlex Partner Medical Dictionary (2012).
  3. Prognathism. (n.d.) Medical Dictionary for the Health Professions and Nursing (2012).
  4. Prognathism. (n.d.) Collins Dictionary of Medicine (2004, 2005).
  5. Prognathism. (n.d.) Medical Dictionary for the Dental Professions (2012).
  6. Plaza SP, Reimpell A, Silva J, Montoya D (2019) Relationship between skeletal Class II and Class III malocclusions with vertical skeletal pattern. Dental Press J Orthod 24(4): 63-72.
  7. Jay Soni, Tarulatha R. Shyagali, Deepak P Bhayya, Romil Shah (2015) Evaluation of Pharyngeal Space in Different Combinations of Class II Skeletal Malocclusion. Acta Inform Med (5): 285-289.
  8. Emad A A Al-Khateeb, Susan N Al-Khateeb (2009) Anteroposterior and Vertical Components of Class II division 1 and division 2 Malocclusion. Angle Orthodontist 79(5).
  9. Haynes S (1970) The prevalence of malocclusion in English children aged 11-12 years. Rep Congr Eur Orthod Soc 89-98.
  10. Lew KK, Foong WC, Loh E (1993) Malocclusion prevalence in an ethnic Chinese population. Aust Dent J 38: 442-449.
  11. Susami R, Asai Y, Hirose K, Hosoi T, Haiyasiii I (1971) The prevalence of malocclusion in Japanese school children. 1. Total frequency. Journal of Japanese Orthodontic Society 30: 221-229.
  12. Kitai N, Ihkada K, Yasuda Y, Adachi S, Hirase E, et al. (1990) Prevalence of malocclusions and demand for orthodontic treatment among students at a women’s high school. Osaka Daigaku Shigaku Zasshi 35: 321-327.
  13. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Moraj LJ (1998) Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES HI survey. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 13: 97-106.
  14. Rosenblum RE (1995) Class II malocclusion: mandibular retrusion or maxillary protrusion? Angle Orthod 65: 49-62.
  15. Young C (2021) What can we do if we see the ABSOLUTELY WRONG DENTAL KNOWLEDGE in the judgment of Dental Council of Hong Kong?
  16. The Dental Council of Hong Kong. Code of Professional Discipline.
  17. Chapter 156 Dentist Registration Ordinance.
  18. Bassett DL (2002) I Lost at Trial-in the Court of Appeals!": The Expanding Power of the Federal Appellate Courts to Reexamine Facts. Houston Law Review 38: 1129
  19. An introduction to Judicial Review.
  20. Https://www.professions.org.au/what-is-a professional/
Citation
Keywords
Signup for Newsletter
Scroll to Top