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