Ted Milo, B.E.E.E., Medical Device Specialist ::::
Key Issues: Dentist was utilizing a specialized dental cement heat gun to set dental cement that was applied to the plaintiff. Shortly following the heat application, the plaintiff suffered a burn to the cheek. The dentist alleges the heat gun was defective.
Expert Analysis: The heat gun used during the procedure was tested as well as an exemplar heat gun. The heat generated by both heat guns was compared to industry standards to determine if either generated enough heat to explain the lesion. The injury-causing heat gun produced a temperature in excess of that considered safe while the exemplar heat gun was well within the industry standards of safe heat.
Conclusion: It was determined that the heat gun used during the procedure was defectively manufactured and was the result of the plaintiff’s injury.Categories: Case Studies