Excellent Experience with Budapest Dentist

Oral Surgeon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD2rCi84oWI

Big_G wrote: »

I don't see a straw man. He attacked your argument with evidence that you provided. What he's saying as that most people would not consider a remake in that short period of time a successful outcome. Just because you don't seem to have a problem with it doesn't make it any less problematic.

Regardless, we can't have a proper debate about your subjective experience anyway. That would be a ridiculously pointless exercise for a number of reasons. We all accept that your subjective experience was good. How could we not? We don't live inside your head. The objective evidence on the other hand suggests a less than ideal result that required remedial correction. That in and of itself isn't the worst thing. It happens to all dentists at one point or another. We can only know objectively if your treatment was appropriate if we had examined you clinically and radiographically before and after treatment. Otherwise this 'discussion' is a giant waste of time and possibly an exercise in trolling.

What you're attempting to do here with this thread is refute the argument that travelling abroad for dental treatment in short time frames increases the risk of less than ideal outcomes by talking about your subjective experience. I'm afraid your subjective experience does not provide an argument against risk. No-ones subjective experience is an argument against risk. It's like people saying 'my granny smoked every day in her life and didn't get cancer' and thereby extending the argument that smoking is not a risk factor for cancer. The problem is for every smoker that doesn't die of smoking related illness, there are many multiples that do die of those illnesses. The same applies to the risk of substandard care or less than ideal outcomes when travelling abroad for short term extensive dental treatment. You might have had a good experience, but there are many more who have had their mouths destroyed by doing the same thing.

So if you want to debate something, bring something that we can debate other than your subjective experience (not a debatable topic, unfortunately).

davo10

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

The dentists in Hungary did fix my original dentures, and at no cost - I still have them as a spare set.

The decision to get new dentures was mine, and was made for aesthetic reasons.

More of the straw man!

So they were not to your satisfaction? After two years you felt the need to have them remade, "for aesthetic reasons"?, what was wrong first time robs and why were you charged again? Enough with the "straw man", your posts are the reason most have concerns about dental tourism.

The paradox in your posts and the reason you cannot be taken seriously is that you went to Hungary because you were unhappy with the standard and cost of treatment at home, yet you happily returned to Hungary when your treatment failed, you accept that aesthetically the treatment was not to your satisfaction and you enthusiastically absorbed the cost of travel, accommodation, inconvenience and ironically remedial treatment just two years after completion. Then you can't wait to tell everyone how great everything is. Strange.

Hillmanhunter1

davo10 wrote: »

So they were not to your satisfaction? After two years you felt the need to have them remade, "for aesthetic reasons"?, what was wrong first time robs and why were you charged again? Enough with the "straw man", your posts are the reason most have concerns about dental tourism.

The paradox in your posts and the reason you cannot be taken seriously is that you went to Hungary because you were unhappy with the standard and cost of treatment at home, yet you happily returned to Hungary when your treatment failed, you accept that aesthetically the treatment was not to your satisfaction and you enthusiastically absorbed the cost of travel, accommodation, inconvenience and ironically remedial treatment just two years after completion. Then you can't wait to tell everyone how great everything is. Strange.

RTFF

davo10

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

RTFF

Read it yourself, what I posted is what you forgot in your updated synopsis. Selective memory? Post about the good bits, ignore the bad bits and say all is good. One thing I should have reminded readers is that the remedial work, you informed us, took 10 days. That is 10 more days in Hungary at your expense to have prosthesis replaced just a short time after it as made. And to think this thread started off with you proclaiming treatment as an unqualified success after 1 year.

I stand by my opinion, the main reason people favour going to Hungary is because it is cheaper, the main worry is poor treatment and concern about what happens if it goes wrong. You got your cheaper treatment, bravo, but you also experienced the downside of dental tourism, prosthesis failure, return travel, being charged again for remedial work. That you chose to ignore the latter is a credit to you, I am certain that you are the perfect dental tourist in the eyes of your favoured clinic, but to most that is not what would be considered an "excellent experience with Budapest Dentist"

Hillmanhunter1

Talk about presenting a target-rich environment! I don't know where to begin.

Well, lets take a stab anyway. Firstly, it is odd to suggest that the person who started a thread that consists mainly of jousts between the OP and various defenders of the Irish dental industry should RTFF. TFF wouldn't exist if I didn't start it and continue to read it from time to time!

You accuse me of selective memory, which must mean that you have access to my memories and have found ones that I haven't disclosed - fair play to you! Is the Nobel Committee aware of this breakthrough?

I have presented all of the information I have in relation to my experiences with one Hungarian dental practice. My experience was positive - I'm sorry (well, not really) if that galls you.

You say that the fact that the prosthesis took 10 days to make meant more days in Hungary at my expense. Had you RTFF you would know that I used the time to visit friends and family in Ireland (I live in the Middle East) and this was all convenient for me. It might not be for everyone, but it was for me, and I have no ambitions in this thread beyond reporting my experiences of using a Hungarian dentist.

You say that my prosthesis failed. This is not true. A couple of veneers fell off and I could easily have had them repaired locally because I still had them. My original prosthesis is still perfect, I still have it, and it still fits my crowns.

It seems to be beyond the comprehension of some interlocutors that I might, for aesthetic reasons, wish to get new dentures. If I confess to vanity that might help explain this. The colour of my first set was slightly yellower than I might have liked because I did not want the contrast between my new mouth and my old mouth to be too sharp. A couple of years later I was ready to move to a much whiter look. Its as simple as that!

The remedial work on my original dentures (basically fixing a couple of veneers) was done for free. If you are not able to RTFF, at least read the posts on the current page!

So, pretty much everything in your post is wrong. This is why I make the straw man reference. "A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on false representation of an opponent's argument. To be successful, a straw man argument requires that the audience be ignorant or uninformed of the original argument."

Your opinion is a different matter. All opinions are not equal, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Perhaps that was better expressed by that great philosopher Clint Eastwood - "Opinions are like a$$holes - everybody's got one".

Oral Surgeon

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

You say that my prosthesis failed. This is not true. A couple of veneers fell off and I could easily have had them repaired locally because I still had them. My original prosthesis is still perfect, I still have it, and it still fits my crowns.

Veneers should not just fall off, this is a failure

Hillmanhunter1

Oral Surgeon wrote: »

Veneers should not just fall off, this is a failure

According to my German dentist it is not unusual, it is a care and maintenance issue (required mainly because I like to chomp tic-tacs while driving). A dental technician can fix it, and the viability and durability of the prosthesis is not compromised.

But then, I suppose what would he know!?

Oral Surgeon

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

According to my German dentist it is not unusual, it is a care and maintenance issue (required mainly because I like to chomp tic-tacs while driving). A dental technician can fix it, and the viability and durability of the prosthesis is not compromised.

But then, I suppose what would he know!?

A veneer can fall off, yes sometimes the bond is compromised or whatever but "A couple of veneers fell off"...!! That is unusual and its funny that you think that its anything but....

davo10

So, to summarise, you went to Hungary to save thousands and get better treatment, your prosthesis failed and you went back, had the free repair but decided for cosmetic reasons to have the prosthesis replaced ( which of course begs the questions about why a relatively new prosthesis failed and why the aesthetics weren't right first time around), you paid God knows how much more in travel/time/accomadation/dental costs which negated the initial saving, but you are happy? You are the perfect dental tourist, if I owned that Clinic I would have a huge poster with the heading "The Perfect Patient, This Year And Every Year", it's a pity there aren't more of you around.

Selective memory? I don't need access to your memory, I just as you put it, need to "RTFF", it's all there. This is getting pathetic Hillmanhunter1, just admit the original treatment failed and you ended up paying more to remedy/improve it. If nothing else, you are providing ample proof (unwittingly of course) of the pitfalls associated with dental tourism, I applaud you Sir.

Big_G

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

The purpose of my post (with periodic updates) is to provide an alternative view to the consensus among the dental industry contributors and mods that travelling to Hungary for cheaper dental treatment is a bad idea.

Yes, my view is subjective, and I am not a dentist, but until the industry participants who hold the opposite view (and who have a clear conflict of interests) adduce some independent empirical evidence (not anecdote, or horror examples) supporting that view, then their view would appear to be subjective too. I am under no more an obligation to provide empirical evidence than you are.

Even with your anecdote, it still remains a bad idea. There are at least 5 threads on this forum with dissatisfied patients and photographic and radiographic evidence of shoddy work done in short timeframes abroad. Five anecdotes beats one anecdote (although that is kind of like saying 5 cents are better than one cent - who cares?).

What you are asking for is impossible. The people who produce the studies and empirical evidence are dentists. Who else studies dental science?

You seem to cite vested interests etcetera but the fact of the matter is that the numbers of people travelling abroad is minute every year. A tiny proportion of the market. Irrelevant, really. What we care about is damage to patients which is often irreversible and, if you really want a motive that is not altruistic, reputational damage to the profession as a whole. I have a problem with shoddy work wherever it is done. However, regardless of wherever you have work done in the world, good work takes time and costs money. That is fact, there is no way of getting around it, it is an irrefutable, universal axiom. What does seem to be a variable is the patient's opinion of what good work is vs what the dentists opinion of what good work is. Did you know that a person's subjective experience is probably the most important determinant of whether or not they are happy with treatment? The dentists job is to ensure that certain minimum standards are met so that the patient isn't damaged and that the work lasts a reasonable amount of time and to make sure that the patient is happy (most important bit). Often times whether or not an objectively good job was done is irrelevant and that is what we are seeing here.

The idea of dental tourists offends anybody who cares about the profession of dentistry (worldwide) and patients because the ONLY thing that can come of it is objectively poor work. Work that doesn't last, look good, or behave harmoniously with the oral tissues. The first two things might be judgeable by a patient (although you seem to have issues with both of them), the last part is why you really see a dentist - the trust to do a good job when the patient doesn't know the difference.

It seems that many of the outcomes that you have experienced you have found satisfactory because you might feel you have gotten a bargain. We are presenting the argument that no bargain was had. I would strongly disagree with your German dentist that it is acceptable for several veneers to fall off and that it is a 'maintenance issue'. It certainly is not. It is a design issue. All things wear and break eventually but in the timeframe you describe with multiple failures (yes it is deemed a failure when the veneer becomes unstuck) I wouldn't think it was acceptable if I were you.

Big_G

Let's please have some manners and not ask people to RTFF.

Hillmanhunter1

davo10 wrote: »

So, to summarise, you went to Hungary to save thousands and get better treatment, your prosthesis failed and you went back, had the free repair but decided for cosmetic reasons to have the prosthesis replaced ( which of course begs the questions about why a relatively new prosthesis failed and why the aesthetics weren't right first time around), you paid God knows how much more in travel/time/accomadation/dental costs which negated the initial saving, but you are happy? You are the perfect dental tourist, if I owned that Clinic I would have a huge poster with the heading "The Perfect Patient, This Year And Every Year", it's a pity there aren't more of you around.

Selective memory? I don't need access to your memory, I just as you put it, need to "RTFF", it's all there. This is getting pathetic Hillmanhunter1, just admit the original treatment failed and you ended up paying more to remedy/improve it. If nothing else, you are providing ample proof (unwittingly of course) of the pitfalls associated with dental tourism, I applaud you Sir.

So, to summarize, you ignore everything I say, and proceed on the basis of what you wish I had said. I don't know if you are a dentist, but if you are I hope you listen more carefully to your patients!

Hillmanhunter1

Big_G wrote: »

Even with your anecdote, it still remains a bad idea. There are at least 5 threads on this forum with dissatisfied patients and photographic and radiographic evidence of shoddy work done in short timeframes abroad. Five anecdotes beats one anecdote (although that is kind of like saying 5 cents are better than one cent - who cares?).

What you are asking for is impossible. The people who produce the studies and empirical evidence are dentists. Who else studies dental science?

You seem to cite vested interests etcetera but the fact of the matter is that the numbers of people travelling abroad is minute every year. A tiny proportion of the market. Irrelevant, really. What we care about is damage to patients which is often irreversible and, if you really want a motive that is not altruistic, reputational damage to the profession as a whole. I have a problem with shoddy work wherever it is done. However, regardless of wherever you have work done in the world, good work takes time and costs money. That is fact, there is no way of getting around it, it is an irrefutable, universal axiom. What does seem to be a variable is the patient's opinion of what good work is vs what the dentists opinion of what good work is. Did you know that a person's subjective experience is probably the most important determinant of whether or not they are happy with treatment? The dentists job is to ensure that certain minimum standards are met so that the patient isn't damaged and that the work lasts a reasonable amount of time and to make sure that the patient is happy (most important bit). Often times whether or not an objectively good job was done is irrelevant and that is what we are seeing here.

The idea of dental tourists offends anybody who cares about the profession of dentistry (worldwide) and patients because the ONLY thing that can come of it is objectively poor work. Work that doesn't last, look good, or behave harmoniously with the oral tissues. The first two things might be judgeable by a patient (although you seem to have issues with both of them), the last part is why you really see a dentist - the trust to do a good job when the patient doesn't know the difference.

It seems that many of the outcomes that you have experienced you have found satisfactory because you might feel you have gotten a bargain. We are presenting the argument that no bargain was had. I would strongly disagree with your German dentist that it is acceptable for several veneers to fall off and that it is a 'maintenance issue'. It certainly is not. It is a design issue. All things wear and break eventually but in the timeframe you describe with multiple failures (yes it is deemed a failure when the veneer becomes unstuck) I wouldn't think it was acceptable if I were you.

I agree that it is dangerous to make generalisations based on specifics, and that anecdotes (including my own) are of limited value. There does however seem to be a determination by some posters that anecdotes that are not in harmony with their outlook must be rubbished.

I'm not an expert in comparing the merits/demerits of dental treatment in different countries, but there must be some research out there? Rigorous research produced by dental bodies themselves should not be discounted just because of who produced the research.

Are there EU-wide dental associations, and do they produce any reports? Are certain countries treated as being below-par by EU health authorities? Are all EU dental qualifications given equal status? Are there EU-wide surveys of dental health?

Big_G

In order to design this study you would have to get a cohort of patients that attended a dental tourist clinic and compare them to a cohort of the general population or better yet a cohort that does not travel for dental treatment. Then you would have to rely on the opinions of trained experts as well as patients themselves to examine the outcomes.
You have a problem with the opinions of trained experts because you believe we all have vested interests. So that makes this study very difficult. We also need access to the cohort of patients who have travelled for treatment which might be very difficult.

I can tell you this much, I will never stop giving the advice to patients that travelling abroad for treatment is a bad idea until I start seeing people coming back from there with a treatment done to a standard that I provide, or that I know my colleagues here can provide. I do know of an excellent clinic in Romania. Their dentists are American trained specialists and their fees are higher than mine but they get excellent results. Results that can be obtained here for the same or less money.

Hillmanhunter1

Big_G wrote: »

In order to design this study you would have to get a cohort of patients that attended a dental tourist clinic and compare them to a cohort of the general population or better yet a cohort that does not travel for dental treatment. Then you would have to rely on the opinions of trained experts as well as patients themselves to examine the outcomes.
You have a problem with the opinions of trained experts because you believe we all have vested interests. So that makes this study very difficult. We also need access to the cohort of patients who have travelled for treatment which might be very difficult.

I can tell you this much, I will never stop giving the advice to patients that travelling abroad for treatment is a bad idea until I start seeing people coming back from there with a treatment done to a standard that I provide, or that I know my colleagues here can provide. I do know of an excellent clinic in Romania. Their dentists are American trained specialists and their fees are higher than mine but they get excellent results. Results that can be obtained here for the same or less money.

I don't disagree with most of your post (though I find it extraordinary that there appears to be no useful research in this area) - I have however just one reservation which is that I don't, as you suggest, have a problem with the opinions of trained experts. I don't post on this forum as a rule. I don't troll other threads, or dispute the advice and opinions given by dental practitioners. I simply tell my story.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

I simply tell my story.

And a cautionary tale it is too, but the irony of this thread is seemingly lost on you. Update us again next year. Cheers.

Hillmanhunter1

Adan Petite Crate wrote: »

And a cautionary tale it is too, but the irony of this thread is seemingly lost on you. Update us again next year. Cheers.

Go mbeirimíd beo ar an am seo arís.

Hillmanhunter1

Nice to see that others share my opinion that excellent dental treatment can be received in Budapest - though I don't think this practice is related to the practice I attended.

http://www.independent.ie/sponsored-features/kreativ-dental-clinic-recognised-as-the-best-in-europe-31252316.html

Oral Surgeon

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

Nice to see that others share my opinion that excellent dental treatment can be received in Budapest - though I don't think this practice is related to the practice I attended.

http://www.independent.ie/sponsored-features/kreativ-dental-clinic-recognised-as-the-best-in-europe-31252316.html

You must have missed the fact that it is a sponsored feature, ie the clinic paid the indo to run the story.
The other important bit is that the IMTJ is the International Medical Travel Journal. It should come as no surprise to anyone that they advocate medical & dental tourism..... That particular clinic has a serious advertising budget so I would imagine that they have invested in that publication before!!!
We have similar "awards" in Ireland you know? You pay to enter your clinic in each category and if you enter enough categories you'll end up winning something!!
Wake up and smell the roses hillman!!!

helimachoptor

Interesting that there doesnt appear to be a dental professional among the judging panel.

Also in the industry i'm in, we see that whoever "sponsors" the most wins...


and the famous Mary.. name rings a bell,

And finally the page is a "sponsored features page"

So.. the awards are sponsored and frankly i would be confident is saying that Kreativ paid a heft amount to "sponsor"

Secondly Mary

Thirdly its a paid for ad on Indo site, not even written by a journo


Their advertising budget is enormous

Hillmanhunter1

Oral Surgeon wrote: »

You must have missed the fact that it is a sponsored feature, ie the clinic paid the indo to run the story.
The other important bit is that the IMTJ is the International Medical Travel Journal. It should come as no surprise to anyone that they advocate medical & dental tourism..... That particular clinic has a serious advertising budget so I would imagine that they have invested in that publication before!!!
We have similar "awards" in Ireland you know? You pay to enter your clinic in each category and if you enter enough categories you'll end up winning something!!
Wake up and smell the roses hillman!!!

Oh I noticed that all right. The IMTJ does have a partisan view on the issue of medical tourism, but then so too do the dentists who post on this forum. I just thought it would be nice to introduce some balance to the debate.

Oral Surgeon

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

Oh I noticed that all right. The IMTJ does have a partisan view on the issue of medical tourism, but then so too do the dentists who post on this forum. I just thought it would be nice to introduce some balance to the debate.

That's not balance, its advertising and it has you hooked!!!
Carlsberg is also probably the best beer in the world- saw it on TV, must be true....

Dianthus

I'm more fascinated that a 35 year old patient (Mary) required&/received 8 dental implants& 26 porcelain crowns.

Hillmanhunter1

Oral Surgeon wrote: »

That's not balance, its advertising and it has you hooked!!!
Carlsberg is also probably the best beer in the world- saw it on TV, must be true....

The fact that it is partisan does not mean that there is not some truth in it. I'm sure you would wish us to believe that the partisan opinions expressed by Irish dentists also contain a grain of truth.

In an earlier post you were happy to post a link to this article:
http://www.dental-tribune.com/articles/news/europe/12836_hepatitis_c_found_in_irish_dental_tourists.html
At that time I noted that dental-tribune.com was "published by Dental Tribune International which describes itself as "the official media partner of the FDI World Dental Federation and regional dental organizations". As a consumer this is not a resource that I would rely upon for disinterested information."

Sauce for the goose and sauce for the gander!?

btkm8unsl0w5r4

That is a paid for advert regarding a worthless self nominated paid for industry award giving second place to a clinic you did not attend. I am really struggling to see what your point is other than to prove that these clinics know people are dumb enough to think that it means something.

No need for further updates on this thread. I will lock it and Hillman give me a PM in middle 2016 and I will open it for your annual update.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

opened for update

Hillmanhunter1

Deep breath!

Discussions on another thread reminded me that I was overdue a check-up so I went looking for my German dentist only to find that he has retired.

The rest of my family use a multi-dentist practice, so I made an appointment yesterday and was seen today. My new dentist is Greek and she trained in Greece.

I went for a routine check-up. My dentist looked at my 7 telescopic crowns and confirmed that there is no sign of decay, and that my gums are healthy. She did a little de-scaling around the abutments, and recommended that I stop using Listerine. She recommended that I use Emoflour Gel on my crowns after brushing at night.

She was highly complimentary on the quality of the work that had been done in Budapest, and in particular on the quality of the fit between the over-dentures and the abutments, resulting of course in a strong bite. "Excellent work" were her words.

As I am now into my sixth year, and as my dentist in Hungary had said that I should be able to expect 10 years out of the treatment I asked her for her assessment. In her opinion I should still have 10 years life in the abutments.

When thinking about making this post I had been bracing myself for the usual onslaught of those who are unable to accept that good quality dental work can be done abroad, and that I received good quality work.

As fitzgeme had locked this thread I needed to ask him to reopen it to make this post. I have however been advised by fitzgeme that I did not show sufficient deference and/or gratitude towards him when requesting that the thread be reopened and that as (I guess) a punishment he intends to close the thread immediately after I post.

A blessing in disguise really!

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Seems I got an admin edit there for posting a PM.

Suffice to say, the OP did not ask in a polite manner for me to reopen the thread, and
I dont expect deference but some civility would be nice. yes I am going to lock this thread after my post to avoid the inevitable tit for tat arguement .

Also its worth doing maths on this your original treatment was Jan 2011 (5 years ago, yes you are in your 6th year, shame on me) and the prosthesis was remade at your expense in 2013 or 14 due to veneer debonds and aesthetic failure (thats what having it remade cause you dont like the look of it is called), I forget which year, making the major part of the prosthesis 2 or 3 years old (or in your 3 or 4th year depending on phrasing). triggers broom

I hope it continues going well for you. Update us in 2017

helimachoptor

thread now open for update

Hillmanhunter1

Latest update!

In June of this year I went back to my dentist in Budapest for a check-up, and also to ask if the fit of the upper denture could be improved. The denture remained secure on its abutments but I had noticed that it wasn't fitting my palate as snugly as it once had.

I was prepared for the possibility that the denture might need to be replaced, so I made appointments for a Friday morning and the following Monday afternoon. (I live in the Middle East now, so it's no great penance to have to stop over in Budapest for a couple of days on my way to or from Ireland - indeed it is very welcome!).

Anyway, on Friday I was pleased to learn that all is well with my gums and telescopic crowns, and that a simple relining rather than replacement of the upper denture was all that was required. I called back on Monday morning, dropped off the dentures (had soup for lunch!) and by late afternoon the job was done. I had a little discomfort for a few days as my gums adjusted to the improved contact.

Total cost for the two appointments and the relining job was 60 Euros.

So, now into my seventh year since my treatment, I remain very happy with the quality of the treatment in received in Budapest, and with the prices.