nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Excellent Experience with Budapest Dentist

Hillmanhunter1

Early in 2010 I looked for some impartial advice on this site concerning the options and the costs of having extensive dental treatment performed in Hungary.

The needlessly restrictive rules of the forum, and the hectoring approach of some posters with obvious conflicts of interest, meant that getting any meaningful information was impossible.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055882151

However I persevered, travelled to Budapest in January 2011 and now, a year later, I can report that it was an unqualified success. The whole experience was superbly organised, I dealt only with competent and kind professionals. I paid a price that did not leave me in debt, and I am over the moon with the result. For the first time in 20 years I've noticed that I can be seen smiling and laughing in photographs.

Due to the posting rules I cannot tell who I went to or how much it cost, however I will be very happy to answer these or any other questions by PM.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

davo10

I like your style Hillman.

The most important aspect is that you the consumer, are happy, the device has exceeded your expectations and you don't mind the cost and inconvenience of re treatment as this is an everyday occurrence in your current place of residence.

Many, Hillman would not be as happy with this as you are. The teeth are supposed to be fit for purpose, hard chewing, that is what they are for. The majority may be upset at having to return for more treatment after three years, ( even if it's a "free" repair) upset at the additional cost and inconvenience.

You are the dream patient, return regularly even when things have not lived up to industry norms, you don't mind paying again and you don't complain. My hat comes off to you Sir, there are not many as easy to please these days.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Hilmanhuntermy me old flower, yes flying is a normal practice. However as a prosthodontic specialist I can tell you the issues you have with your over denture aren't normal anywhere. The reason it is better to take time with treatment is to avoid returning only three years later for reline or remake on a multi thousand overdenture. The reason teeth are falling off is either poor bite control or laboratory error. The reason you need a reline is cause insufficient time was given to initial healing or you periodontal disease is progressing. The roof of your moth does not resorbe. But you would accept anything to confirm you made the right decision. I am glad the dental treatment you have consumed is to you liking (did you swallow the teeth after they broke off).

This thread proves so many of the points I have made over the year, deserves to be a sticky. Goes to show, as much as I know of dental tourism and it's consequences it takes a shill and a happy customer to prove my points.

Hillmanhunter1

davo10 wrote: »

I like your style Hillman.

The most important aspect is that you the consumer, are happy, the device has exceeded your expectations and you don't mind the cost and inconvenience of re treatment as this is an everyday occurrence in your current place of residence.

Many, Hillman would not be as happy with this as you are. The teeth are supposed to be fit for purpose, hard chewing, that is what they are for. The majority may be upset at having to return for more treatment after three years, ( even if it's a "free" repair) upset at the additional cost and inconvenience.

You are the dream patient, return regularly even when things have not lived up to industry norms, you don't mind paying again and you don't complain. My hat comes off to you Sir, there are not many as easy to please these days.

Your post is as good an example as one could hope for of the disrespect and disdain that the Irish dental profession, particularly as sometimes articulated on this site, exhibits towards the consumers of their services. The person who pays the dentists bills deserves to be treated respectfully and to get a fair deal. Many Irish consumers believe they get neither of these from the Irish dental profession and that is why they go abroad, not because they are stupid.

I am happy with my treatment, and that is important. I'm the one who is shelling out my hard-earned money and my opinion counts. I know that I have received good quality treatment at a substantial discount to what treatment of a similar standard in Ireland would have cost.

The customer may not always be right, but when you fail to give them good value or to treat them with respect you can't be surprised if they go elsewhere. There's also more than a little intolerance on this site of any opinion that differs from the orthodox "foreigner bad - paddy good" mantra of many of the serial posters.

Hillmanhunter1

Adan Petite Crate wrote: »

Hilmanhuntermy me old flower, yes flying is a normal practice. However as a prosthodontic specialist I can tell you the issues you have with your over denture aren't normal anywhere. The reason it is better to take time with treatment is to avoid returning only three years later for reline or remake on a multi thousand overdenture. The reason teeth are falling off is either poor bite control or laboratory error. The reason you need a reline is cause insufficient time was given to initial healing or you periodontal disease is progressing. The roof of your moth does not resorbe. But you would accept anything to confirm you made the right decision. I am glad the dental treatment you have consumed is to you liking (did you swallow the teeth after they broke off).

This thread proves so many of the points I have made over the year, deserves to be a sticky. Goes to show, as much as I know of dental tourism and it's consequences it takes a shill and a happy customer to prove my points.

It doesn't seem to me that the problems that I had with one veneer (is that the right term?) on my original dentures are unusual. I also see, looking at several British and American websites, that the average lifetime of dentures is estimated at 5-7 years. I'm sure you've studied enough statistics to know that one should be wary of averages, no doubt some last longer than that and some do not. I'm sure I could easily have gotten a few more years out of mine, but I decided to get new dentures.

You say that "The reason you need a reline is cause insufficient time was given to initial healing or you periodontal disease is progressing." If you read my earlier post you will see that it was 2 and a half years after the treatment that I noticed a slight space between my upper dentures and my palate. Do you normally require your patients to wait 2 and a half years before fitting dentures? As for the question of periodontal disease I can only say that the both the German dentist that I see locally, and the Hungarian dentist who treated me, both say that my gums are in excellent condition. But then perhaps the opinion of two foreign dentists who actually looked into my mouth is worth less than the opinion of one Irish dentist who has not.

You also say that the roof of my mouth does not resorbe. After a quick look at my dictionary I still have no idea what you are talking about - speak English man! I suspect that you are referring to my earlier comment to the effect that the shape of the roof of my mouth had changed slightly over the three years? Again I find plenty of evidence that the shape of our mouths changes over time, that this is normal and to be expected, and that as a consequence dentures may need to be adjusted.

Finally, to sate your scatological curiosity, I did not swallow the teeth - are you disappointed?

davo10

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

I am happy with my treatment, and that is important. I'm the one who is shelling out my hard-earned money and my opinion counts. I know that I have received good quality treatment at a substantial discount to what treatment of a similar standard in Ireland would have cost.

.

You are quite right, the important point is that you, the consumer, is happy. Happy to spend money twice on the same treatment three years apart, happy to travel twice, happy to have 10 days of treatment. Though you may feel you got good quality treatment, many consumers, not just dentists would argue that this is not satisfactory. Most consumers would expect more, expect longer from their teeth, the teeth they spent their hard earned cash on.

You feel you got good quality dental treatment at a discount, your description does not support this. You got discounted treatment which is of questionable standard if it fails after three years.

I don't care where you have your treatment, a prosthesis which fails after 3 years should be questioned. It is your Dentist's very good luck that your expectations are so low and your compliance so high.

Just as you may feel we are a perfect example of biased irish clinicians, you are the perfect example of the perils of having complicated treatment while on holiday. You are happy to travel to Hungary again, happy to pay again, happy to have the treatment redone by the same clinician, I can assure you 99% of consumers would not be so enthusiastic about doing so. Perhaps if it was all free under warranty and the flights and hotels were paid for they would. This is not disrespect or desdain, this is reality.

A discount is great when you are buying something which is worth a lot more. A discount on something which is not worth more is just the right price for that item. If you are happy with something that failed after a short time then you got what you paid for at the right price for you, wherever it was bought.

Kinda like buying financial advice in Doha, a consumer will not know all the intricacies of stock market fluctuations, there is an information assummetry, that is why they pay a professional advisor. If you buy financial advice at a discount and it turns out to be worth more than you paid for it, you are quids in, if it turns out to be ok, then you probably paid what it was worth but it's not a discount, if it turns out to be crap, you wasted your money no matter how much or how little you paid for it.

This isn't about where the consumer lives, be it Ireland, UK, Germany, Qatar , Hungary etc, it's about traveling to a foreign country wherever that is for extensive treatment. You do not know what the accepted standard of treatment is, what your options are when things go wrong, whether, like you, you will have to travel back and get re-treatment at your expense, whether treatment is being rushed to completion while you are on holiday, whether the treatment planning is influenced by the length of your stay, access to aftercare, the legal system etc. Hillman I don't think you should have had treatment in Ireland, if you live in Qatar you would have been better advised to have it there. You would have easy access to the clinician and knowledge of what is acceptable standards and the consumer rights legislation if needed. No doubt you have now spent more than if you had it in Qatar in the first place. And I am certain there are dentists there who could have done that for you, every University in Europe and the US has a significant number of Middle Eastern students and post grads.

Elfski

oconnom wrote: »

Dear Moderator,

You obviously have the wrong person as I was not on TV a few years ago...., I wish I was ??? Last May when I came on board we ran a TV ad.....,
I visited one of the best dental clinic's in Ireland on my return, (as advised by the Irish dentist who referred me) This clinic employ a maxifillio facial surgeon, he was highly impressed with the work carried out, so much so that they are now on board with us, here in Ireland.
It really does not matter, you are obviously not a dentist, you have not seen my teeth and we are getting in excess of 600 patients per month, so we do not need to advertise on somewhere like this. However I did what your advertising people suggested many times, to try it out. !!!!

By the way I love my Full Porcelain Zirconium crowns combined with my implants, as does everybody else. Why are we receiving so many patients ?. I also received bite restoration treatment not just a gum shield which was never suggested here. I don't expect you to understand Gnathology treatment or Arcus Digma ...,

This is all that matters.

Thanking you anyhow,

I will not be using this forum again, so you need have no concerns.

There is no need for a reply

Mary

This concerns me greatly. You say an Irish dentist ( trained here I presume) and an Irish maxillofacial surgeon is recommending your clinic. Ireland has very few maxillofacial surgeons. I would appreciate a pm from you as to the clinic you are referring, I want to be sure of not referring any of my patients your way.
Sorry to stir it up fitzge but I am really shocked here, does anyone know the clinic she is referring to ? A pm would be appreciated.

Hillmanhunter1

davo10 wrote: »

You are quite right, the important point is that you, the consumer, is happy. Happy to spend money twice on the same treatment three years apart, happy to travel twice, happy to have 10 days of treatment. Though you may feel you got good quality treatment, many consumers, not just dentists would argue that this is not satisfactory. Most consumers would expect more, expect longer from their teeth, the teeth they spent their hard earned cash on.

You feel you got good quality dental treatment at a discount, your description does not support this. You got discounted treatment which is of questionable standard if it fails after three years.

I don't care where you have your treatment, a prosthesis which fails after 3 years should be questioned. It is your Dentist's very good luck that your expectations are so low and your compliance so high.

Just as you may feel we are a perfect example of biased irish clinicians, you are the perfect example of the perils of having complicated treatment while on holiday. You are happy to travel to Hungary again, happy to pay again, happy to have the treatment redone by the same clinician, I can assure you 99% of consumers would not be so enthusiastic about doing so. Perhaps if it was all free under warranty and the flights and hotels were paid for they would. This is not disrespect or desdain, this is reality.

A discount is great when you are buying something which is worth a lot more. A discount on something which is not worth more is just the right price for that item. If you are happy with something that failed after a short time then you got what you paid for at the right price for you, wherever it was bought.

Kinda like buying financial advice in Doha, a consumer will not know all the intricacies of stock market fluctuations, there is an information assummetry, that is why they pay a professional advisor. If you buy financial advice at a discount and it turns out to be worth more than you paid for it, you are quids in, if it turns out to be ok, then you probably paid what it was worth but it's not a discount, if it turns out to be crap, you wasted your money no matter how much or how little you paid for it.

This isn't about where the consumer lives, be it Ireland, UK, Germany, Qatar , Hungary etc, it's about traveling to a foreign country wherever that is for extensive treatment. You do not know what the accepted standard of treatment is, what your options are when things go wrong, whether, like you, you will have to travel back and get re-treatment at your expense, whether treatment is being rushed to completion while you are on holiday, whether the treatment planning is influenced by the length of your stay, access to aftercare, the legal system etc. Hillman I don't think you should have had treatment in Ireland, if you live in Qatar you would have been better advised to have it there. You would have easy access to the clinician and knowledge of what is acceptable standards and the consumer rights legislation if needed. No doubt you have now spent more than if you had it in Qatar in the first place. And I am certain there are dentists there who could have done that for you, every University in Europe and the US has a significant number of Middle Eastern students and post grads.

In any safe and fair market I would expect that responsible providers of the relevant goods and/or services would consider consumer satisfaction (both in terms of quality and price) to be at least one of the most important factors – if not the most important factor – in in shaping their market strategy. When I read the first sentence of your post I thought that we were ad idem, but of course I quickly realized that I was merely being set up for a cruel put-down.

I read something recently that succinctly defined the difference between dentists and other health-care professionals “Unlike many other areas of healthcare, dental patients are frequently ‘well’ when they attend for care and treatment. In contrast to general medicine or surgery, it could be said that dentistry is akin to servicing your car, as opposed to repairing it after a crash”. The author (Dr Roger Matthews) notes that general dental health standards have improved in the EU over the past 20 years or so, and that the bulk of the business of the average dentist has moved away from tooth loss/retention to elective cosmetic dentistry of one form or another. Customers who are electing to purchase cosmetic dental services have the time to shop around, and many understand that this is a good thing to do.

Dental standards throughout the EU are broadly similar. The Council of European Dentists (CED) publishes a document called the EU Manual of Dental Practice. The Manual is a an assessment and comparison of the practicing arrangements, the regulatory frameworks and systems within which dentists work in the respective countries. I can be found at http://www.eudental.eu/index.php?ID=35918

I note that in the body of the CED assessment, where comparisons are made, the assessment notes that:
· as at the date of accession to the EU dental raining in Hungary complied with the requirements of the Dental Directives (page 17);
· the duration of a Hungarian dentist’s training is 5 years – the same as Ireland (page 31);
· dentistry is regulated in Hungary, on a statutory basis, by the Ministry of Health (page 36);
· there is 1 dentist per 1826 persons in Hungary and 1 per 1714 in Ireland (page 37); and
· Professional indemnity insurance is mandatory in both Hungary and Ireland (page 51);

The assessment also contains individual country sections. There are no adverse comments in relation to standards in the Section dealing with Hungary (or Ireland).

The CED counts the Irish Dental Association among its members and so if you disagree with any of the above I would urge you to take it up with the Irish Dental Association rather than with me.

The disparity in prices between Dublin and Budapest is not due to avarice on the part of Irish dentists or lower standards in Hungary. It is simply down to the fact that the standard of living in Ireland is much higher than in Hungary. Even after several years of austerity the Gross Domestic Product (at Purchasing Power Parity) in Ireland is $43,592, almost double that for Hungary at $22,119. Wages/salaries, taxes, insurance and rents are higher in Ireland, and pretty much everything is cheaper in Hungary.

The problem is that we can’t go to Budapest for the weekly grocery shop, or to get a doctor’s cert for work if we are sick, but we can go there for comparatively expensive elective cosmetic surgery. People appear to be doing this in very large numbers. Anecdotally, while waiting for my appointments, I noticed many French and Austrian patients at the surgery that I used. More specifically, I’ve seen data that suggests that 8,500 Irish people went to Hungary for dental treatment in 2010, along with over 21,000 from each of the UK and Switzerland and 45,000 and 49,300 from Austria and Germany respectively.
http://english.hsmtc.hu/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Final_case_study_web.pdf

You suggest that the market for dental services is vulnerable to market failure (arising from information asymmetry) and on this we do agree. The information asymmetry in the market for dental services, as with the market for financial products/services exists between the product/service providers and the consumers. Because conflicts of interest must be clearly seen to be resolved the product/service providers are not credible source of consumer information. This is the rationale for disinterested regulation, where the provision of independent information for consumers, and the limitation of unacceptable practices, is undertaken by an independent agency that enjoys the confidence of both the industry and consumers.

I understand that the dental industry in Ireland is regulated by the Irish Dental Council. Its website says that “Its general concern is to promote high standards of professional education and professional conduct among dentists”. There is no mention of consumer information. I note that of the 22 Members of the Dental Council currently listed on their website 12 appear to be practicing dentists and/or educators in the dental profession and a further 3 are representatives of dental technicians/hygenists/nurses. That’s 15 out of the 22 who appear to make a living out of the dental industry. I have absolutely no reason to question or doubt the integrity of any member of the Dental Council, nor of the Council as a whole, and I do not do so, but can it be said that it is a disinterested regulator? Compare this to the much-maligned Central Bank where the 10-person Commission has no industry representatives though, according to their website, 4 members have at some point in their careers worked in private banking or insurance firms.

Finally, your certainty that I could have had my treatment performed in Qatar is misplaced. There are some American, Canadian, British and European trained dentists here, and the dentist that I go to is a German national, trained in Germany. Telescopic crowns seem to be more common in continental Europe than in the UK – at least the UK trained dentist that I initially visited was intrigued by my treatment - I think she hadn’t seen it outside of textbooks. My German dentist was a dental technician before training-up to be a dentist. He had been involved in making overdentures as a dental technician, but I am his only patient here who has had this treatment. There is no expertise in Qatar for fabricating overdentures.

[Deleted User]

Ah yeah, it's all the same....

http://www.dental-tribune.com/articles/news/europe/12836_hepatitis_c_found_in_irish_dental_tourists.html

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

In any safe and fair market I would expect that responsible providers of the relevant goods and/or services would consider consumer satisfaction (both in terms of quality and price) to be at least one of the most important factors – if not the most important factor – in in shaping their market strategy. When I read the first sentence of your post I thought that we were ad idem, but of course I quickly realized that I was merely being set up for a cruel put-down.

I read something recently that succinctly defined the difference between dentists and other health-care professionals “Unlike many other areas of healthcare, dental patients are frequently ‘well’ when they attend for care and treatment. In contrast to general medicine or surgery, it could be said that dentistry is akin to servicing your car, as opposed to repairing it after a crash”. The author (Dr Roger Matthews) notes that general dental health standards have improved in the EU over the past 20 years or so, and that the bulk of the business of the average dentist has moved away from tooth loss/retention to elective cosmetic dentistry of one form or another. Customers who are electing to purchase cosmetic dental services have the time to shop around, and many understand that this is a good thing to do.

Dental standards throughout the EU are broadly similar. The Council of European Dentists (CED) publishes a document called the EU Manual of Dental Practice. The Manual is a an assessment and comparison of the practicing arrangements, the regulatory frameworks and systems within which dentists work in the respective countries. I can be found at http://www.eudental.eu/index.php?ID=35918

I note that in the body of the CED assessment, where comparisons are made, the assessment notes that:
· as at the date of accession to the EU dental raining in Hungary complied with the requirements of the Dental Directives (page 17);
· the duration of a Hungarian dentist’s training is 5 years – the same as Ireland (page 31);
· dentistry is regulated in Hungary, on a statutory basis, by the Ministry of Health (page 36);
· there is 1 dentist per 1826 persons in Hungary and 1 per 1714 in Ireland (page 37); and
· Professional indemnity insurance is mandatory in both Hungary and Ireland (page 51);

The assessment also contains individual country sections. There are no adverse comments in relation to standards in the Section dealing with Hungary (or Ireland).

The CED counts the Irish Dental Association among its members and so if you disagree with any of the above I would urge you to take it up with the Irish Dental Association rather than with me.

The disparity in prices between Dublin and Budapest is not due to avarice on the part of Irish dentists or lower standards in Hungary. It is simply down to the fact that the standard of living in Ireland is much higher than in Hungary. Even after several years of austerity the Gross Domestic Product (at Purchasing Power Parity) in Ireland is $43,592, almost double that for Hungary at $22,119. Wages/salaries, taxes, insurance and rents are higher in Ireland, and pretty much everything is cheaper in Hungary.

The problem is that we can’t go to Budapest for the weekly grocery shop, or to get a doctor’s cert for work if we are sick, but we can go there for comparatively expensive elective cosmetic surgery. People appear to be doing this in very large numbers. Anecdotally, while waiting for my appointments, I noticed many French and Austrian patients at the surgery that I used. More specifically, I’ve seen data that suggests that 8,500 Irish people went to Hungary for dental treatment in 2010, along with over 21,000 from each of the UK and Switzerland and 45,000 and 49,300 from Austria and Germany respectively.
http://english.hsmtc.hu/site/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Final_case_study_web.pdf

You suggest that the market for dental services is vulnerable to market failure (arising from information asymmetry) and on this we do agree. The information asymmetry in the market for dental services, as with the market for financial products/services exists between the product/service providers and the consumers. Because conflicts of interest must be clearly seen to be resolved the product/service providers are not credible source of consumer information. This is the rationale for disinterested regulation, where the provision of independent information for consumers, and the limitation of unacceptable practices, is undertaken by an independent agency that enjoys the confidence of both the industry and consumers.

I understand that the dental industry in Ireland is regulated by the Irish Dental Council. Its website says that “Its general concern is to promote high standards of professional education and professional conduct among dentists”. There is no mention of consumer information. I note that of the 22 Members of the Dental Council currently listed on their website 12 appear to be practicing dentists and/or educators in the dental profession and a further 3 are representatives of dental technicians/hygenists/nurses. That’s 15 out of the 22 who appear to make a living out of the dental industry. I have absolutely no reason to question or doubt the integrity of any member of the Dental Council, nor of the Council as a whole, and I do not do so, but can it be said that it is a disinterested regulator? Compare this to the much-maligned Central Bank where the 10-person Commission has no industry representatives though, according to their website, 4 members have at some point in their careers worked in private banking or insurance firms.

Finally, your certainty that I could have had my treatment performed in Qatar is misplaced. There are some American, Canadian, British and European trained dentists here, and the dentist that I go to is a German national, trained in Germany. Telescopic crowns seem to be more common in continental Europe than in the UK – at least the UK trained dentist that I initially visited was intrigued by my treatment - I think she hadn’t seen it outside of textbooks. My German dentist was a dental technician before training-up to be a dentist. He had been involved in making overdentures as a dental technician, but I am his only patient here who has had this treatment. There is no expertise in Qatar for fabricating overdentures.

davo10

A magnificent post full of references to EU studies, literature anecdotes etc. None of which is relevant to the topic, travelling for dental treatment, the advantages and disadvantages. Does the literature you refer to say that a person should be happy to travel again when work fails? To pay again? To be inconvenienced again? Does it say anything about the Dentists policy for re-treatments? Anything about access to the legal systems? Policies of the Hungarian dental council and their attitude to tourists/non citizens?. Do the documents tell you which Dentists are good, which ones are naughty?

The standards I'm sure are excellent in every country, it's just that not many Hungarians get multiple crowns and over dentures while they are on their weeks holiday, they leave that type of thing to the foreign visitors. If a Hungarian's denture breaks, they only have to phone and pop down the road, you had to go to a different continent, which one is smarter?

Of course their is an information assummetry in all professions, one side is a trained professional, the other is a consumer wishing to avail of the information that person possesses. Simples.

Hillman you can dress this up any way you like, you can tell yourself that the EU says your work must have been done by a good dentist but at the end of the day you are in denial, you should face the facts, in three years you have had to travel and pay twice for the same treatment. You might be cool with that but most consumers and all dentists worldwide would not. As I said, you are the perfect dental tourist, your Hungarian dentist must wish all his patients were as gullible.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

The Kubler-Ross stages of change of attitude, or change in zeitgeist. First you are content, then your in denial about the problem. The dental tourists often starts by vigorously publicly defending their decision, they are often abnormally public about such a private matter, then they deny there are problems and often rant at those that pick at the crack of doubt that is open, then they are confused what to do and embarassed, then they change their opinion.

Hillmanhunter you started here in the contentment zone and have now moved to the denial zone. Your transition to the next stages are unlikely to be done publicly on the forum. BTW I trained with a guy from Quatar (in ireland) during my postgrad who is super at making overdentures and can help you. PM me if you need his details.

[Deleted User]

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

All in all this one-person longitudinal study is going fine so far!

So Hillman, have you recommended this clinic and form of treatment to your family, friends or Boards.ie users??
If so, how many people have you advised to get treatment? How many have done so?
There's nothing worse than a bad recommendation, you just don't know it yet...

Hillmanhunter1

Oral Surgeon wrote: »

Ah yeah, it's all the same....

http://www.dental-tribune.com/articles/news/europe/12836_hepatitis_c_found_in_irish_dental_tourists.html

This is a fairly wooly piece of journalism, complete with generalisations, a red-herring and a non-sequiter. Smells of the dark art of PR. Can you post a link to Dr Norris' published paper?

Hillmanhunter1

Oral Surgeon wrote: »

So Hillman, have you recommended this clinic and form of treatment to your family, friends or Boards.ie users??
If so, how many people have you advised to get treatment? How many have done so?
There's nothing worse than a bad recommendation, you just don't know it yet...

Yes I have. I have recommended it to over 30 Boards.ie users. I use a standard reply - I give them the name and contact details of the practice that I used and I urge them to do their own research. I have no idea how many people might have acted on that information.

I have reported to my friends and family in the same terms as I have o this board. None have required major dental treatment in the past 3 years.

Hillmanhunter1

davo10 wrote: »

A magnificent post full of references to EU studies, literature anecdotes etc. None of which is relevant to the topic, travelling for dental treatment, the advantages and disadvantages. Does the literature you refer to say that a person should be happy to travel again when work fails? To pay again? To be inconvenienced again? Does it say anything about the Dentists policy for re-treatments? Anything about access to the legal systems? Policies of the Hungarian dental council and their attitude to tourists/non citizens?. Do the documents tell you which Dentists are good, which ones are naughty?

The standards I'm sure are excellent in every country, it's just that not many Hungarians get multiple crowns and over dentures while they are on their weeks holiday, they leave that type of thing to the foreign visitors. If a Hungarian's denture breaks, they only have to phone and pop down the road, you had to go to a different continent, which one is smarter?

Of course their is an information assummetry in all professions, one side is a trained professional, the other is a consumer wishing to avail of the information that person possesses. Simples.

Hillman you can dress this up any way you like, you can tell yourself that the EU says your work must have been done by a good dentist but at the end of the day you are in denial, you should face the facts, in three years you have had to travel and pay twice for the same treatment. You might be cool with that but most consumers and all dentists worldwide would not. As I said, you are the perfect dental tourist, your Hungarian dentist must wish all his patients were as gullible.

It seems to me that the strategy that you and some other posters on this board use is to scare people away from buying a lower cost product of equivalent quality to that available in Ireland. Its a case of never mind cool rational argument - look at these gory pictures, this is what will happen to you too if you take your business elsewhere.

I have no idea about the Hungarian policy for re-treatments, access to the legal systems,or the policies of the Hungarian dental council and their attitude to tourists/non citizens? But then I've no idea about these issues as they relate to Irish dentists either. It wasn't a factor in my decision. If you want to do something useful why don't put a bit of effort into a post, do some research yourself - give us something that evidences an engagement with the debate that goes beyond scaremongering.

I don't understand your reference to Hungarians not travelling abroad for elective cosmetic surgery - of course they don't - did you not get the bit about the significance of GDP (at PPP)?

The fact that you mis-understood and mis-spelled asymmetry twice in two separate posts suggests to me that information asymmetry and market failure, and the reasons why they should be of concern to policy-makers and ways in which they can be addressed, are not themes that you are overly familiar with.

Hillmanhunter1

Adan Petite Crate wrote: »

BTW I trained with a guy from Quatar (in ireland) during my postgrad who is super at making overdentures and can help you. PM me if you need his details.

Please do PM me details of this guy, I'll certainly check him out.

davo10

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

It seems to me that the strategy that you and some other posters on this board use is to scare people away from buying a lower cost product of equivalent quality to that available in Ireland.

I have no idea about the Hungarian policy for re-treatments, access to the legal systems,or the policies of the Hungarian dental council and their attitude to tourists/non citizens? But then I've no idea about these issues as they relate to Irish dentists either.

I don't understand your reference to Hungarians not travelling abroad for elective cosmetic surgery - of course they don't - did you not get the bit about the significance of GDP (at PPP)?

The fact that you mis-understood and mis-spelled asymmetry twice in two separate posts suggests to me that information asymmetry and market failure

I think your experience should scare people more than anything I could post. Travel abroad, get treatment, treatment fails, travel again, pay again, no guarantee it's any better second time around. Scary.

Regarding Hungarians traveling abroad, again you missed the point, focus on the bigger picture. My point is, Hungarian Dentists could be the best in the world but only dental tourists are silly enough to have extensive and complicated treatment crammed in to a week, do you think the locals would have their treatment done that way?

Why would you have any knowledge of their policies? you have no need, you are just willing to travel and pay again. Docile.

Will you now PM those 30 people and tell them that after three years you had to fly back and pay again?

Concentrating on trivial spelling mistakes to try and score points is a sign of a weakening position, the joys of typing on a phone.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

This is a fairly wooly piece of journalism, complete with generalisations, a red-herring and a non-sequiter. Smells of the dark art of PR. Can you post a link to Dr Norris' published paper?

The data is unpublished, but Professor Norris is a seriously well respected researcher and not to be taken lightly. She has no dog in this fight and no reason to deceive. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Norris%20S%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21998177)

Hillmanhunter1

Adan Petite Crate wrote: »

The data is unpublished, but Professor Norris is a seriously well respected researcher and not to be taken lightly. She has no dog in this fight and no reason to deceive. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=Norris%20S%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=21998177)

Without knowing anything about her I can clearly see from a few minutes of internet searching that Dr Norris is highly regarded researcher. The problem is that Dr Norris did not write the article cited.

The article begins by referring to an announcement, which I take to mean that someone somewhere issued a press release, feeding a story to willing media. The article then refers to another media report in the Irish Times which it seems is no longer visible to the general public. I don't get the sense that the reporter read the research paper, and now that you've confirmed that it is unpublished that suspicion is strengthened.

The article says that 10,000 dental tourists have been identified as having Hep C. I have a lot of questions about this. What evidence is there that the Hep C was contracted in the course of dental treatment abroad? The article does not make this connection explicitly and we cannot review the underlying research paper. I could just as easily say that x number of dental tourists contracted the common cold last year. Who are these 10,000 people and from what population were they identified? How many, if any, are Irish? What proportion of the whole population studied does this 10,000 represent? A review of a population of this magnitude would be an enormous exercise - did Dr Norris conduct the research into this population or is she relying on another study or studies?

The article goes on to attribute to Dr Norris a statement to the effect that the majority of these people (ie 5000 + 1?) had travelled to countries such as Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria and South Africa. This is quite a range of countries, and the construction of this sentence gives no clue as to what proportion had travelled to each country.

Next comes this really odd statement about some infected people (no detail given) also having received tattoos using unhygienic equipment. I assume that it is mentioned because it is relevant, but the connection to dental tourism is not provided. So did these 10,000 people (or indeed the whole population studied) also have tattoos? What proportion contracted Hep C from the tattoos? I note that other reputable research shows that tattooing is associated with a higher risk of Hep C infection.
http://natap.org/2010/HCV/tatoohcv.pdf

The next sentence is equally perplexing. Having led with the 10,000 dental tourists have Hep C the article now says "the reported number of cases appears to be small". What are to make of this?

Finally the granularity of the Irish data referred to appears to be sufficient to allow for the determination that "no cases of transmission have been reported following dental or cosmetic treatments carried out in Ireland" I assume that the data should therefore also allow for a determination of whether or not cases of transmission were identified among Irish consumers who received dental treatment abroad, but that information is not given. Is that because it would not support the perspective of the author?

I'm not really asking you to answer any of these questions, I pose them merely to expose this article for what it is, a wooly puff piece in a trade magazine, no doubt based on a press release written by someone who may or may not have read the underlying research.

I note that according to their own website www.dental-tribune.com is 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.

bubblyone

davo10 wrote: »

I think your experience should scare people more than anything I could post. Travel abroad, get treatment, treatment fails, travel again, pay again, no guarantee it's any better second time around. Scary.

Regarding Hungarians traveling abroad, again you missed the point, focus on the bigger picture. My point is, Hungarian Dentists could be the best in the world but only dental tourists are silly enough to have extensive and complicated treatment crammed in to a week, do you think the locals would have their treatment done that way?

Maybe I'm a bit off topic here-found this thread in a fit of procrastination where researching gold onlays led me to Hungarian site which made me wonder how people who got their work done in Hungary were doing-but I just kind of wanted to mention why I *didn't* choose to go abroad.

I've had work done in Ireland and have been living in Canada for nearly 4 years where it continued. Neither place has bargains when it comes to dentistry and I've always been up to my eyes in debt. I really did wonder about going abroad when I knew I'd need a lot of work (including 2 implants so far. Probably more to come).

However, I stuck with the local people and I'm glad. Maybe someone in Hungary would have done a nice job; however there is a great sense of security from having the person who did the work nearby. I got my follow-ups from the person who actually did the surgery. If I had had a problem, it would have been easy to see them at short notice. My own dentist was involved in both places and had made the referral so was involved in the planning and care before and after the implant. There was communication back and forth.

For the Canadian implant I needed a sinus lift. The oral surgeon's initial hope was to place the implant at the time, but when he went in he wasn't happy with the native bone so didn't chance it. I really do have to wonder if someone in a time crunch would have made the same call. We were able to allow plenty of time to heal. The implant placement was a doddle then. There was again lots of time for my dentist to make the bridge I needed-including sending it back for adjustments because it wasn't 100% perfect and he wouldn't place it without being completely happy. Over my long dental patient career I've learned that things don't always go to plan. I like to have my peeps in proximity.

Cost? Not cheap. But it's my health! Crowns falling off, periodontal disease, bits chipping etc are miserable. You don't get to eat or smile like a normal person. Good work lasts. To be honest though, I went to a Hungarian site and starting totting it up. My implants are Straumann, and by the time I'd added up all the bits and pieces for the Nobel range on their site, there wasn't an enormous difference. And for me, everything was a flat rate including the follow-ups, OPGs etc. And a guarantee that they'd fix any complications.

Like all work, time will tell. If I'm back in Ireland for a visit I might have to get fitzgmeme to have a look and give his opinion! (The cantilever bridge was my idea-not the dentist's). I just wanted to give my 2 cents on getting complex work done locally versus all in one go abroad.

bubblyone

Kind of completely off topic now...but looks like I might be heading to Birmingham next, so if anybody has recommendations there that would be great!

jim-mcdee

Hi,
Just wondering if anyone could recommend <SNIP>?They have a clinic in Dublin and Hungry. I need at least two crowns and several fillings, but possibly more, I don't know. I am prepared for some risk. The last root canal I got here failed after 6 months, 650 euro down the drain. So I may as well spend half there, then if it fails at least I wont be as heavily out of pocket as here.

MOD EDIT- Please read the forum charter. No names of clinics are allowed in the forum.

Hillmanhunter1

Hi all

I'm just back in the office having paid a visit to my dentist - a German dentist working in the Middle East, where I now live.

The latest report in my one-man longitudinal survey continues to be good.

To recap on the work I had done I have cut'n'paste the following paragraphs from an earlier post from 2012:

"My first appointment was in the Dublin surgery where I was examined by two dentists. They took X-rays and discussed a treatment plan with me. 30 years of smoking and poor oral hygiene meant that my teeth, and in particular my gums, were in pretty poor condition. I had thought that I might be able to get some implants but I was told that because my gums and jaw-bones had receded the likelihood of success with that treatment was slim. The advice of the dentists was that overdentures were the best option for me. Google “overdenture” and you’ll get a better idea of what that is, but for the lay person, essentially they proposed to extract those of my teeth that couldn’t be saved (11) and to fit telescopic crowns to those that could (7). The telescopic crowns would serve to anchor the overdenture and give a better bite than standard dentures. (If anyone can explain that better please go ahead).

I travelled to Budapest for the first part of the treatment on a Sunday evening in late 2010. I was met at the airport and brought to an OK hotel (clean & comfortable but pretty basic). Next morning a representative met me at the hotel and brought me to the clinic. Over that day I had 11 teeth extracted and impressions were taken for temporary dentures. I didn’t have a general anaesthetic, and while I had dreaded having so much work done in one day it wasn’t as traumatic as I feared. I was given painkillers and sent back to the hotel where, to my surprise, I had a good night’s sleep. Next day I went back to the clinic for a half an hour for a first fitting of my temporary dentures. The following day I went back for a final fitting and I flew home that evening.

I was told that it would take at least two months for my gums to heal, however after a few days back in Dublin I found that the temporary dentures were hurting me and needed to be adjusted. I called the surgery in Dublin and was seen later that day, were the necessary adjustments were made.

In February 2011 I returned to Budapest for a week to have my treatment completed. Over the first two days I had one root canal treatment, two fillings, and temporary crowns were fitted to my remaining teeth (7). I had several sessions at the clinic over the following two days where impressions for my final overdentures were made, and on the Friday morning the 7 telescopic crowns were fitted and my overdentures were also ready. I flew back to Dublin that evening."

So, now it is 4 and a half years after my treatment, and the posts fashioned from the 7 teeth that were not extracted are still fit for purpose and solid. My gums are healthy, my dentures still fit well, my bite is strong and I have no sore patches. All in all, as well as could be expected.

davo10

Hillmanhunter1 wrote: »

Hi all

I'm just back in the office having paid a visit to my dentist - a German dentist working in the Middle East, where I now live.

The latest report in my one-man longitudinal survey continues to be good.

To recap on the work I had done I have cut'n'paste the following paragraphs from an earlier post from 2012:

"My first appointment was in the Dublin surgery where I was examined by two dentists. They took X-rays and discussed a treatment plan with me. 30 years of smoking and poor oral hygiene meant that my teeth, and in particular my gums, were in pretty poor condition. I had thought that I might be able to get some implants but I was told that because my gums and jaw-bones had receded the likelihood of success with that treatment was slim. The advice of the dentists was that overdentures were the best option for me. Google “overdenture” and you’ll get a better idea of what that is, but for the lay person, essentially they proposed to extract those of my teeth that couldn’t be saved (11) and to fit telescopic crowns to those that could (7). The telescopic crowns would serve to anchor the overdenture and give a better bite than standard dentures. (If anyone can explain that better please go ahead).

I travelled to Budapest for the first part of the treatment on a Sunday evening in late 2010. I was met at the airport and brought to an OK hotel (clean & comfortable but pretty basic). Next morning a representative met me at the hotel and brought me to the clinic. Over that day I had 11 teeth extracted and impressions were taken for temporary dentures. I didn’t have a general anaesthetic, and while I had dreaded having so much work done in one day it wasn’t as traumatic as I feared. I was given painkillers and sent back to the hotel where, to my surprise, I had a good night’s sleep. Next day I went back to the clinic for a half an hour for a first fitting of my temporary dentures. The following day I went back for a final fitting and I flew home that evening.

I was told that it would take at least two months for my gums to heal, however after a few days back in Dublin I found that the temporary dentures were hurting me and needed to be adjusted. I called the surgery in Dublin and was seen later that day, were the necessary adjustments were made.

In February 2011 I returned to Budapest for a week to have my treatment completed. Over the first two days I had one root canal treatment, two fillings, and temporary crowns were fitted to my remaining teeth (7). I had several sessions at the clinic over the following two days where impressions for my final overdentures were made, and on the Friday morning the 7 telescopic crowns were fitted and my overdentures were also ready. I flew back to Dublin that evening."

So, now it is 4 and a half years after my treatment, and the posts fashioned from the 7 teeth that were not extracted are still fit for purpose and solid. My gums are healthy, my dentures still fit well, my bite is strong and I have no sore patches. All in all, as well as could be expected.

You seem to have forgotten the part about having to return in 2013 to have the over dentures remade, after 2 years, at your expense.

helimachoptor

davo10 wrote: »

You seem to have forgotten the part about having to return in 2013 to have the over dentures remade, after 2 years, at your expense.

Boooom :pac:

Hillmanhunter1

davo10 wrote: »

You seem to have forgotten the part about having to return in 2013 to have the over dentures remade, after 2 years, at your expense.

Nice to see that the standard of debate around here hasn't moved on from the straw man fallacy.

Hillmanhunter1

helimachoptor wrote: »

Boooom :pac:

Big_G

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).

Hillmanhunter1

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).

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.

davo10

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.

For many who have and would consider travelling for treatment, their main concern would be the standard of treatment and what happens if it goes wrong. In your case the treatment went wrong after two years, you had to travel back to Hungary for remedial treatment and you had to pay. To you that is acceptable, to the majority that would be completely unacceptable and weigh heavily against any decision to travel. At the very least, most would expect a prosthesis which failed in such a time period to be replaced at the Clinic's expense leaving you just to pay for flights, hotel and inconvenience but you have already stated that you had to also pay for the remake. Not many would characterise your experience as successful nor value for money.

Hillmanhunter1

davo10 wrote: »

For many who have and would consider travelling for treatment, their main concern would be the standard of treatment and what happens if it goes wrong. In your case the treatment went wrong after two years, you had to travel back to Hungary for remedial treatment and you had to pay. To you that is acceptable, to the majority that would be completely unacceptable and weigh heavily against any decision to travel. At the very least, most would expect a prosthesis which failed in such a time period to be replaced at the Clinic's expense leaving you just to pay for flights, hotel and inconvenience but you have already stated that you had to also pay for the remake. Not many would characterise your experience as successful nor value for money.

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!