TRAnsparency
Will supervision of some aspect of the
physician’s practice address the issue?
NO
YES
Will practice restrictions
address identified issues?
Is the physician cooperative and
willing to engage?
NO
NO
Outcome:
Undertaking to
Resign or Discipline
Hearing
Public
YES
Outcome:
SCERP
and/or
Caution-in-Person
Outcome:
Voluntary Undertaking
and/or
Caution-in-Person
Public
Public
YES
Outcome:
Undertaking with
Restrictions
and/or
Caution-in-Person
Public
W
hen evaluating clinical cases, the
Inquiries, Complaints and Reports
Committee (ICRC) will use the risk
posed to patients as the main measure to distinguish between those cases that result in
outcomes that are public and those that result in nonpublic outcomes.
The decision tree above assists the ICRC in evaluating
the degree of risk posed in cases.
What is not represented in the decision tree, however,
are those cases in which a lack of professionalism, coop-
eration or insight forms a part of the concern. Physicians
who yell at colleagues, are rude to patients, bill inappropriately or put themselves in a conflict of interest may
be exhibiting behaviour for which censure is warranted.
If the ICRC is of the view that the behavioural issue is
significant, the ICRC may order a caution-in-person or
refer allegations to the Discipline Committee, both of
which are public outcomes.
We will provide more information about the ICRC’s
evaluation of professionalism/conduct issues in the next
issue of Dialogue.
Issue 2, 2015 Dialogue
33