The Ontario Health Professionals Appeal and Review Board has upheld a ruling that requires a physiotherapist to complete a Specified Continuing Education or Remediation Program (SCERP). The Board’s decision, which also mandates an in-person caution, stems from multiple complaints regarding his behaviour while employed at Kinetic Care Physiotherapy.
The case, which was brought to the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario by a former office manager at the clinic where the physiotherapist worked, highlighted serious concerns about his conduct during his brief tenure. O.O. was employed as a physiotherapy resident at the clinic from March 16, 2021, until May 24, 2021, when he was terminated due to what the clinic described as “aggressive and unprofessional behaviour with both co-workers and patients,” as well as his failure to complete patient records.
The College’s Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee initially investigated the matter and found the complaints to be substantiated. The Committee’s decision to impose the SCERP and caution was contested by O.O., who argued that the investigation was inadequate and that his Charter rights were violated. However, the Appeal and Review Board found no merit in these claims, stating that the Committee had conducted a thorough and adequate investigation.
The complaints against O.O. covered several critical areas, including sexual harassment, unprofessional behaviour, poor interprofessional communication, and deficient record-keeping. While the Committee did not find sufficient evidence to support the claims of sexual harassment, it noted that the alleged conduct raised serious concerns about his professional boundaries and behaviour.
Shoddy record-keeping
One of the findings during the investigation was related to O.O.’s record-keeping practices. The Committee found that at the time of his termination, there were 113 incomplete patient appointment notes, a situation that posed significant risks to the continuity of patient care.
The Committee was particularly concerned that these deficiencies dated back to his first day at the clinic, suggesting a persistent failure to meet professional standards.
The Board’s decision emphasized the importance of these records for patient care, stating that “physiotherapy residents and physiotherapists have professional responsibilities to fulfill their record-keeping obligations, regardless of their employment situation.” The ruling also highlighted that O.O. had been given alternative means to complete these notes but failed to do so adequately.
Physiotherapist says complaints were retaliation
In his defence, O.O. argued that the complaints were made in retaliation for a wrongful dismissal lawsuit he filed against the clinic. However, the Board noted that the Committee had considered this possibility and still found the concerns raised to be credible and significant enough to warrant remedial action.
The SCERP that O.O. is required to complete will focus on key areas where the Committee found his conduct lacking: patient and interprofessional communication, interprofessional behaviour, and record-keeping. Additionally, O.O. must attend an in-person caution to address the specific issues raised in the complaints.
Actions ‘reasonable’: Board
The Board’s ruling confirms that the actions taken by the Committee were “reasonable,” emphasizing that the decision was “transparent, intelligible and justified.” It further notes that the Committee’s actions were consistent with the College’s mandate to maintain high standards of practice and to protect the public from professional misconduct.
The case now concludes with the Board confirming the Committee’s original decision, reinforcing the importance of professional conduct and the serious consequences that can arise when these standards are not met.
For more information, see Osho v Khan, 2024 CanLII 73873 (ON HPARB).
