# RDH Law and Ethics practice questions: Professional practices

Five original RDH Law and Ethics practice questions on professional practices, each answered on this page with a rationale and a source.

Last updated: 2026-07-25.

## Question 1

Running behind, a hygienist charts a full-mouth periodontal probing she did not perform, reasoning that the readings "would have been the same as last time." How is that best characterized?

- A. Acceptable time management, because the entry still reflects her considered clinical judgment.
- B. A minor documentation lapse, curable by re-probing the patient at her next recall visit.
- C. Unprofessional conduct — knowingly charting a fact that did not occur is itself a disciplinary offense.
- D. A problem only if the readings she recorded later prove to be clinically inaccurate.

**Answer C:** Unprofessional conduct — knowingly charting a fact that did not occur is itself a disciplinary offense.

knowingly making a statement or signing a document that falsely represents the existence or nonexistence of a fact related to practice is unprofessional conduct, as is altering a record with intent to deceive.

**Common trap:** the honest fix for a charting error is a new, dated correction entry that leaves the original visible — never a fabricated or overwritten one.

Source: [Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 1950.5 — Unprofessional Conduct Defined, subds. (a)–(z): fee fraud (a); aiding or abetting unlicensed or unlawful practice…](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=1950.5.&lawCode=BPC)

## Question 2

A practice is clearing out old paper charts and plans to place them in the building's recycling dumpster after tearing off the covers. What does California law require?

- A. Removing the patient's name from the first page of each chart is sufficient de-identification.
- B. Destruction that preserves confidentiality — shredding or the equivalent — for paper charts as well.
- C. Nothing special once the retention period has ended; the records may be discarded in any manner.
- D. Secure destruction is required for electronic records only, not for closed paper charts.

**Answer B:** Destruction that preserves confidentiality — shredding or the equivalent — for paper charts as well.

CMIA requires that medical information be created, maintained, preserved, stored, abandoned, destroyed, and disposed of in a manner that preserves confidentiality, and that duty covers paper charts.

**Common trap:** retention periods govern when records may be destroyed; they never authorize how they are discarded. Note the federal boundary too: the HIPAA Privacy Rule reaches PHI in every medium, but the Security Rule's administrative, physical, and technical safeguards apply to electronic PHI only, so they are not the authority for a paper-shredding answer.

Source: [Cal. Civ. Code § 56.10 et seq. — Confidentiality of Medical Information Act: the disclosure prohibition, mandatory and permissive disclosure lanes, §…](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=56.10.&lawCode=CIV)

## Question 3

A general dental office in Sacramento uses this charting protocol: each provider types a narrative note for the day, and at the end of the day the supervising dentist signs the bottom of the chart page covering all entries by all providers, including the RDH's prophylaxis and scaling services. The RDH's own name appears nowhere next to the services she performed. Under the Dental Hygiene Practice Act, is this protocol sufficient?

- A. Yes, because the supervising dentist is legally responsible for all services performed under general supervision in his office.
- B. Yes, because the practice management software time-stamps every entry with the logged-in user's name and role.
- C. No, because the RDH must sign her name or identification number and initials next to each service she performed, and date those entries.
- D. No, but only if the patient later requests a copy of the record or the board audits the chart entries.

**Answer C:** No, because the RDH must sign her name or identification number and initials next to each service she performed, and date those entries.

BPC § 1953 requires an RDH, RDHAP, or RDHEF "who performs a service on a patient in a dental office" to "identify himself or herself in the patient record by signing his or her name or identification number and initials next to the service performed," and to date those treatment entries. The identification attaches per service, not per page or per visit, so a page-level countersignature by anyone else does not satisfy the statute. A repeated violation of the identification requirement is itself unprofessional conduct and can support DHBC discipline.

**Common trap:** The supervising-dentist answers feel right because the dentist bears clinical responsibility for generally supervised services — but responsibility for the care and identification in the record are separate duties. The software-timestamp option is the modern version of the same error: an audit trail is good practice, not the statutory signature-and-initials-next-to-the-service mechanic. And the violation is complete when the entry is made; it does not wait for a records request.

Source: [Dental Hygiene Board of California, 2025 Dental Hygiene Board of California Laws and Regulations (revised January 2025) — reprinting BPC § 137…](https://www.dhbc.ca.gov/lawsregs/new_dhbc_2025_laws_and_regulations_book.pdf)

## Question 4

Two days after a periodontal maintenance appointment, an RDH in Long Beach realizes she charted the scaling as upper-right when she actually treated the upper-left quadrant. The chart is electronic and the software allows her to open and rewrite the original note. What is the correct way to fix the error?

- A. Open the original note, correct the quadrant, and save it under the original treatment date so the chart reads accurately.
- B. Delete the incorrect entry entirely and re-enter the visit correctly under the original treatment date.
- C. Ask the supervising dentist to make the change, since he is the legal custodian of the record.
- D. Add a new, dated correction entry that identifies and fixes the error while leaving the original entry visible.

**Answer D:** Add a new, dated correction entry that identifies and fixes the error while leaving the original entry visible.

BPC § 1950.5(q) makes "the alteration of a patient's record with intent to deceive" unprofessional conduct, and subdivision (z) separately reaches knowingly making a statement or signing a document that falsely represents the existence or nonexistence of a fact. The lawful protocol is therefore additive, not substitutive: a new, dated, transparent correction entry that leaves the original legible preserves both accuracy and the audit trail, and it keeps the § 1953 identification-and-date mechanic intact for the new entry.

**Common trap:** Options A and B are tempting because the final chart reads more accurately, and candidates reason that a good-faith fix cannot be "intent to deceive." But rewriting or deleting under the original date destroys the evidence that the error ever existed, which is exactly what the alteration rule targets — and a chart that silently changes months later is the worst possible exhibit in a board investigation. Option C mistakes record custody for authorship; the hygienist documents her own services.

Source: [Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 1950.5 — Unprofessional Conduct Defined: fee fraud (a), false-name advertising (e), commissions/rebates (f), deceptive…](https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=1950.5.&lawCode=BPC)

## Question 5

An RDHAP in Bakersfield owns a registered physical facility and also operates a mobile dental hygiene clinic. A patient is discharged on June 1, 2026. Under the DHBC's regulations governing these facilities, what is the minimum period the owner must maintain that patient's treatment records and related communications?

- A. Two years after the patient's date of discharge.
- B. Five years after discharge from the practice.
- C. Seven years after the date of discharge.
- D. There is no retention period; HIPAA governs and sets none.

**Answer C:** Seven years after the date of discharge.

The DHBC's 2025 facility regulations state that all dental hygiene patient treatment records and communications relating to the patient's care following discharge "shall be maintained by the owner for a minimum of seven (7) years," and they apply the same rule to a mobile dental hygiene clinic and to an RDHAP's registered physical facility. Both regulations also require compliance with HIPAA's security standards for the patient's protected health information while the records are held.

**Common trap:** Option D exploits a real fact taken one step too far — HIPAA's Privacy and Security Rules impose safeguards without prescribing a universal medical-record retention period, so candidates conclude no number exists. The DHBC regulations supply the number this exam can test. Options A and B come from stale prep: the mobile-clinic and RDHAP-facility regulations took effect January 1, 2025, so any study material written earlier simply does not contain the seven-year rule.

Source: [16 CCR § 1116 — Mobile Dental Hygiene Clinics: seven-year post-discharge record retention, HIPAA security compliance, and the…](https://www.dhbc.ca.gov/lawsregs/new_dhbc_2025_laws_and_regulations_book.pdf)

## Next step

[Take the free 15-question practice test](https://dentovio.com/rdh/free-practice-test)

Official reference: [DHBC/PSI RDH Laws and Ethics Written Examination Candidate Information Bulletin](https://www.dhbc.ca.gov/formspubs/candidate_handbook.pdf). Original exam-style questions written for study, never recalled exam content. Independent educational preparation, not legal advice, and not affiliated with or endorsed by the Dental Hygiene Board of California or PSI. Confirm current requirements with the Dental Hygiene Board of California.