discipline summaries
and a further 12-month period of supervision as the MRP. The following facts were set out in an Agreed Statement of Facts on Penalty. In January 2015, the College initiated an investigation to determine whether Dr. Patel was treating patients while under suspension. An undercover investigator posing as a patient called Dr. Patel’ s clinic, and was told by the receptionist that Dr. Patel was currently taking new patients, and that Mr. M could attend to enroll and see Dr. Patel. Mr. M attended at Dr. Patel’ s clinic. Mr. M told a woman at reception wearing scrubs that he had contacted the office the day before and been told to come in if he needed to see Dr. Patel. When Mr. M agreed to join the clinic, the staff member handed him a computer tablet and requested that he fill in information on the device. After Mr. M had filled in the information on the device, a female wearing blue scrubs gave him a cup and asked for a urine sample. Subsequently, a staff member led Mr. M to an examination room. On the way, Mr. M saw Dr. Patel sitting in an office area( this was not a patient examination room). There were large monitors at the station where Dr. Patel was sitting, one of which was connected to a CCTV system that showed footage of what was happening in the office. Dr. Patel appeared to be browsing through some paperwork. Dr. Patel was wearing street clothes( not scrubs). In the examination room, the staff member appeared to operate a voice recording device to record her interaction with Mr. M. She checked Mr. M’ s height and weight and asked him to sit on the examination table. She then asked a series of questions regarding Mr. M’ s family history, medical history and symptoms for approximately 15 minutes, pausing at one point to take his blood pressure. When Mr. M asked if the doctor was busy, the staff member stated,“ later, he not here now.” The staff member then informed Mr. M that she needed to take his blood, and removed five vials of blood from Mr. M. When asked why so much blood was taken, she replied,“ just the one time, once in a year.” The staff member then informed Mr. M that he would need to go for X-rays or ultrasound. She gave him directions to a lab and printed out an X-ray requisition form and handed it to Mr. M. She then advised Mr. M that the doctor would be with him shortly and exited the room. Dr. Z, who was working as a locum at the clinic at the time, then entered the room and introduced himself. Among other things, Dr. Z took a history of the presenting complaint, checked Mr. M’ s vital signs, used a tongue depressor to check his throat, and used a stethoscope to listen for any irregularities in the breathing. Dr. Z also consulted the computer where the staff member had recorded Mr. M’ s medical history. During the assessment, Mr. M asked Dr. Z if he was Dr. Patel. Dr. Z said“ No”. Dr. Z gave Mr. M a prescription and suggested that he go for a chest X-ray. On his way out of the examination room, Mr. M noted that Dr. Patel was still sitting in the office area looking at the computer monitor in front of him. Dr. Patel did not speak or interact with Mr. M in any way. To the best of Mr. M’ s knowledge, information and belief, Dr. Patel did not have any involvement in his medical treatment and care. During the 40 minutes that he was at the office, Mr. M did not observe Dr. Patel in any of the patient examination rooms. Mr. M did not observe Dr. Patel providing medical treatment or care to any patients. Mr. M did not observe Dr. Patel speaking or interacting with patients. Also in January 2015, a second investigator, Ms O, called Dr. Patel’ s clinic. Dr. Patel had not yet been advised by the College that an undercover patient had been sent to his office to determine whether he was providing medical care while under suspension. Ms. O asked if she could see Dr. Patel for an illness. The receptionist informed Ms. O that Dr. Patel was temporarily not practising medicine, and that she did not know when he would return to practice. By letter dated July 31, 2014, Dr. Patel provided reimbursement to the Ministry of Health and Long- Term Care in the amount of $ 86,428.94, for overpayments received from OHIP. The Committee admitted in the penalty hearing the evidence of Dr. W. The Committee accepted Dr. W as an expert in family medicine and medical education qualified to opine on the practice of family medicine, and the assessment, remediation of deficits supervision and monitoring of community-based
54
Dialogue Issue 2, 2016