Hazards are an integral part of health care delivery and the associated logistics. Currently, the general opinion seems to be that health care delivery should be risk-free. Care consumers seem to be becoming more conscious of their ‘rights’ to receive adequate care. If the care delivered is not consistent with their expectations, people are aware of the feasibility of claiming their ‘rights’ and suing their doctor. Significant questions in this respect are what people can reasonably expect, when one can speak of failure or negligence, and in which circumstances a negative outcome is a standard hazard which should be accepted.

Concerning cases of liability, dentists in the future will probably have to call on expert help or act as experts on behalf of a colleague with increasing frequency. Dentists who consider acting as experts in liability cases will have to develop their expertise especially in civil law and disciplinary law. Matters which in this respect should receive special attention are: the expert must act in conformity with the law on Medical Treatment Agreement; the expert’s report must make clear what the legal basis is of the report’s conclusions; the legal basis must be substantially supported by the facts, conditions and findings that are mentioned in the report; the expert must act independently and refrain from subjective judgments, assumptions and unprofessional and prejudicial qualifications.

The quality of radiodiagnostics is crucial because of its important role in general diagnostics and the subsequent treatment planning. Nowadays, digital radiology is providing many new opportunities, such as optimization of contrast and brightness of the radiographic image. Nevertheless, it is a fact that not every abnormality is discovered and recognized, in spite of the technological advancements. The perceptive abilities of the observer is in many circumstances the limiting factor. The question is how crucial an incorrect observation of the presence or absence of an abnormality on the radiograph is and what the clinician can do to minimize the chance of mistakes as much as possible. The decision to make a radiograph and the choice of imaging technique are essential. An oral health care provider can take advise with several guidelines, indicating what is currently considered good practice by the profession.

A proposal for restorative treatment is based on the expected efficiency of the treatment. Efficiency is determined by measuring the investment, such as the monetary and biological cost, against what is gained, such as functional restoration and durability. If one’s goal is to save tooth tissue in the restorative process, it is interesting to compare the conventional fixed partial denture with the adhesive fixed partial denture. The mean survival rate of conventional fixed partial dentures clearly exceeds the mean survival rate of adhesive fixed partial dentures but there are biological risks. Loss of vitality of the abutment teeth and the occurrence of caries are more prominent with conventional fixed partial dentures than with adhesive fixed partial dentures. Consequently, the possibility of replacing a conventional fixed partial denture with a new conventional fixed partial denture is limited. Because this and other clinical aspects cannot easily be expressed numerically, the patient should be informed qualitatively about the advantages, disadvantages and uncertainties of the various types of fixed partial dentures.

Despite high survival percentages of oral implants and suprastructures, various risks threaten the success of oral implant treatments. Four risk categories can be distinguished: complications during surgical treatment, loss or impending loss of the implant, fracture or wearing out of (parts of) the suprastructure, and patient dissatisfaction with the treatment outcome. The question is when a complication can be expected on the basis of present-day knowledge in a certain percentage of cases and when one can speak of negligence. In cases where treatment is carried out in accordance with the most recent protocols, guidelines and recommendations, there can be no question of liability. It is proposed that retreatment is carried out without any costs if an implant or a superstructure is lost within one year post-treatment.

With millions of resources available on the internet, it is still difficult to search for appropriate and relevant information, even with the use of advanced search engines. With no systematic quality control of online resources, it is difficult to determine how reliable information is. The consortium Intute, which administers a databank of high quality information available via the internet, which is intended to support scientific teaching and research, ensures that all information provided has been evaluated and investigated by its own team of specialists in various disciplines. A part of the website of Intute which is accessible free of charge is the Virtual Training Suite, by means of which one can improve one’s competence in internet searching and where a number of reliable and qualitatively superior sources for daily practice are available.