skip to main content

Aspiration Incident Reporting — ORE Part 1 MCQ

Instant feedback + full explanation. One question, done properly.

HardBehavioural Sciences & EthicsAspiration Incident ReportingORE Part 1

During crown fitting in an independent dental practice in England, a patient aspirates a crown and is transferred to hospital, where bronchoscopy is required to retrieve it. The event occurred during dental treatment and did not involve ionising radiation. Which action best reflects the practice's reporting and professional obligations?

Educational content. Not a substitute for clinical judgement or local policy.

Reveal the answer and explanation

Correct answer: C — Record and report the incident through the practice system, document it in the clinical record, be open and honest with the patient, and investigate learning; do not submit a RIDDOR report for the treatment accident.

Explanation lettering: D = shown as A · A = shown as C · E = shown as D · C = shown as E

A is correct. Aspiration requiring bronchoscopy is a patient-safety incident: it must be accurately documented, reported through the practice’s incident-reporting process, discussed openly with the patient with an apology and explanation, and reviewed to identify preventive learning. However, HSE specifically exempts accidents occurring during medical or dental treatment from RIDDOR reporting. IR(ME)R is irrelevant because no ionising-radiation exposure is involved. B is therefore wrong solely because it mandates RIDDOR. C is wrong because there is no routine requirement to notify the GDC of this incident. D is wrong because direct CQC notification is not the routine universal response; regulatory notification depends on the provider and applicable notification rules. E omits incident reporting, candour and learning.

Reference: Health and Safety Executive, "Exemptions" (RIDDOR): accidents during medical or dental treatment are not reportable under RIDDOR. Current guidance. https://www.hse.gov.uk/riddor/exemptions.htm