Dialogue Volume 14 Issue 1 2018 | Page 54

DISCIPLINE SUMMARIES
with respect to his record keeping by copying sections of notes from one patient file to another .
Investigation of Patient Complaints The Committee found that Dr . Hill failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession with respect to his investigation of patient complaints and referrals for testing . Both experts agreed that in some cases , Dr . Hill under-investigated complaints and in other cases , he over-investigated . For example , in the case of Patient D , Dr . X noted that there were four clinical visits over two years which documented abdominal pain that was not investigated or treated . For Patient G , Dr . Y noted that Dr . Hill treated anemia with iron without investigating the cause of the anemia . For other patients , both experts noted that Dr . Hill ordered numerous laboratory tests without documented indications .
Management of Diabetic Patients The Committee further found that Dr . Hill failed to maintain the standard of practice of the profession with respect to his treatment of diabetic patients . Dr . X opined that Dr . Hill ’ s diabetic control for one patient was “ terrible , with no indication of referral to a diabetes education program , discussions with the patient , or a referral to an endocrinologist .” Dr . Y supported Dr . X ’ s concerns with respect to this patient .
DISGRACEFUL , DISHONOURABLE , OR UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT The Committee found that Dr . Hill engaged in conduct that was disgraceful , dishonorable , or unprofessional in two respects : in his communications with Patient A and in his falsification of patient records . The Committee concluded that Dr . Hill ’ s response to Patient A ’ s demands for financial compensation was unprofessional . Although Patient A ’ s behaviour following the diagnosis of his rectal cancer may have been inappropriate , Dr . Hill ’ s response was unprofessional in trying to paint Patient A as a person with mental health issues . With respect to the falsification of patient records , the Committee found that forgeries were evident in Dr . Hill ’ s charts going back to 2004 . Dr . X testified that falsification of records by duplicating patient charts occurred in 11 of the 26 charts he reviewed . For one chart , the entire clinical record was a forgery . Dr . Hill admitted to copying charts , stating that he did so as a means of cutting down his workload . The Committee held that falsifying charts is dishonest and deceitful and reflects a lack of moral fitness to discharge the obligations expected of a member of the College .
INCOMPETENCE The Committee determined that Dr . Hill ’ s charting and patient care reflected a lack of knowledge , skill and judgment to an extent that demonstrates that he is unfit to continue to practise or that his practice should be restricted . The Committee found that Dr . Hill is incompetent . The Committee accepted the evidence of Dr . X , who concluded that since at least 2010 , Dr . Hill ’ s level of practice had seriously degraded to the point where Dr . Hill is incompetent and engaging in substandard care . Following his interview with Dr . Hill , Dr . X concluded that Dr . Hill had significant knowledge gaps for common medical conditions and often under-investigated or over-investigated patients . The Committee also found that Dr . Hill displayed a significant lack of judgment in duplicating notes from one patient ’ s chart to another .
ORDER The Discipline Committee ordered : the revocation of Dr . Hill ’ s certificate of registration ; a reprimand ; payment of costs to the College in the amount of $ 69,538 . For complete details of the Order , please see the full decision at www . cpso . on . ca . Select Find a Doctor and enter the doctor ’ s name .
On December 2 , 2016 and June 10 , 2017 , Dr . Hill appealed the Committee ’ s decisions on liability and penalty to the Divisional Court of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice . Pursuant to s . 71 of the Code , the Discipline Committee ’ s decision remains in effect despite the appeal .
54
DIALOGUE ISSUE 1 , 2018