discipline summaries
did not attend his own hearing . No explanation was provided as to why he was not present . Dr . Glumac ’ s absence demonstrated a lack of respect for his governing body , which can be taken into account in the event of any future application for reinstatement . Under section 85.7 of the Code , the Committee ordered that Dr . Glumac reimburse the College for funding of counselling or therapy for Patient A , should she require it , up to the amount of $ 16,060 to be secured by an irrevocable letter of credit or other security acceptable to the College within 30 days . Finally , the Committee also acknowledged this was an appropriate case to award costs to the College . As jointly submitted , Dr . Glumac must pay the tariff amount of $ 5,000 for the one-day hearing . In summary , the Committee ordered : revocation of Dr . Glumac ’ s certificate of registration ; a public reprimand ; reimbursement to the College for funding provided to patients under the program required under section 85.7 of the Code , and the posting of an irrevocable letter of credit in the amount of $ 16,060 ; and payment for costs to the College in the amount of $ 5,000 .
At the conclusion of the hearing , Dr . Glumac waived his right to appeal and the Committee administered the public reprimand .
Order For complete details of the Order , please see the full decision at www . cpso . on . ca . Select Doctor Search and enter the Doctor ’ s Name .
Dr . CREIGHTON HUI
Practice Location : Newmarket
Area of Practice : Family Medicine , Emergency Medicine
Hearing Information : Admission , Agreed Statement of Facts , Joint Submission on Penalty
On April 28 , 2016 , the Discipline Committee found that Dr . Creighton Hui committed an act of professional misconduct , in that the governing body of a health profession in a jurisdiction other than Ontario has found that Dr . Hui committed an act of professional misconduct that would , in the opinion of the Committee , be an act of professional misconduct as defined under Ontario legislation . Dr . Hui has practised emergency medicine at a hospital in Ontario since February 2012 . Prior to that , Dr . Hui lived in Manitoba for a fellowship in emergency medicine . In August 2010 , Dr . Hui began seeing patients at Clinic A in Manitoba and providing house calls . Between April 2011 and January 2012 , Dr . Hui entered into an arrangement with a nurse practitioner from the Clinic ; the nurse practitioner would make house call visits to patients which would be billed to Manitoba Health in Dr . Hui ’ s name . The nurse practitioner proposed that Dr . Hui could attend house call visits via live video stream . While Dr . Hui did attend some house call visits by live video stream , he did not attend all of them . For these visits described above , the nurse practitioner would enter Dr . Hui ’ s user identifier and password in the electronic medical record . It was therefore unclear from the medical record that Dr . Hui had not personally attended the patient or made the entry . To facilitate this arrangement , Dr . Hui gave the nurse practitioner his password for the electronic medical record system so that the nurse practitioner could sign on and make chart entries under Dr . Hui ’ s name . This was done in spite of the fact that the nurse practitioner had his own user identifier and password , could have made entries under his own name , and could have written prescriptions under his own name . Between April 2011 and January 2012 , Manitoba Health was billed approximately $ 201,223 for house call services provided by the nurse practitioner and billed in the name of Dr . Hui . Dr . Hui ultimately voluntarily repaid the entire $ 201,223 to Manitoba Health . The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba ( CPSM ) commenced an investigation of Dr . Hui in February 2012 . During the investigation , Dr . Hui made a number of statements to the CPSM that he subsequently admitted were not true , for example that he supervised all patient visits by the nurse practitioner via live video link , as well as that he subsequently reviewed all of the nurse practitioner ’ s chart entries . Dr . Hui subsequently admitted that he was not always present on the video link system ;
58
Dialogue Issue 2 , 2017