DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES
the anesthesia will be administered in a safe manner in a hospital setting and that their anesthesiologist will have the requisite knowledge, skill, and judgment. Such an assumption by the public is a fair one.
PENALTY AND REASONS FOR PENALTY The Discipline Committee observed that Dr. Straka’ s deficiencies, while serious, should be viewed in the context of the following mitigating circumstances:
• Dr. Straka had been practising under supervision pending the outcome of this hearing. The corresponding reports to the College were positive;
• An integral part of his supervision was a review and approval of all pre-operative assessments, treatment plans, and observation of all intubations;
• In April 2016, Dr. Straka’ s documentation had improved significantly, his preoperative assessments were complete, and there were no issues in respect of technical tasks;
• The defence expert observed Dr. Straka in April 2016 discussing risks and benefits with patients about to undergo blocks;
• Dr. Straka was cooperative throughout the investigation. His admission saved witnesses from having to testify and a lengthy hearing; and
• The Committee was influenced by the defence expert’ s opinion that Dr. Straka was remediable. The Committee viewed Dr. Straka’ s improvement to date as a demonstration of his insight, motivation, and capacity to improve.
The Committee was concerned that there were remaining gaps in Dr. Straka’ s knowledge and management in some circumstances. In particular, the Committee was concerned about his management of high risk or complicated patients and his administration of regional anesthesia. In addition, the Committee was concerned that Dr. Straka’ s reaction to stress may compromise his judgment. It was clear to the Committee that a broad range of terms imposed on Dr. Straka’ s certificate of registration would be necessary to ensure public safety. The Committee accepted that the proposed remedial plan detailed in the jointly submitted penalty was comprehensive and sufficiently broad to achieve the goal of protecting the public. The Committee was satisfied that the proposed penalty would protect the public and maintain its confidence in the profession. The administration of a reprimand would denounce the conduct and provide specific deterrence to the member. The reprimand enabled the Committee to emphasize to Dr. Straka that there are serious consequences of failing to maintain the standard of practice and that he is responsible to make all efforts necessary to successfully complete the required education. The broad range of rehabilitative terms, conditions, and limitations, including further education and supervision, was ordered to protect the public and maintain its confidence in the profession.
ORDER In summary, the Committee ordered a reprimand; a broad range of terms, conditions and limitation on Dr. Straka’ s certificate of registration, including further education and supervision, and an initial period during which Dr. Straka was not to perform anesthesia in a hospital setting on an on-call basis; and costs in the amount of $ 10,000. 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.
At the conclusion of the hearing, Dr. Straka waived his right to an appeal and the Committee administered the public reprimand.
70
DIALOGUE ISSUE 3, 2017