Quarterly report of all closed conduct files from October 1, 2023 – December 31, 2023.
Disclaimer: decisions may vary depending on the circumstances. The reasons for a decision must be considered in light of the evidence and the actual issues pertaining to the allegation.
Case 1
Allegation
The patient’s continuation of care was not managed effectively by the physiotherapist manager (Physiotherapist A) when the patient’s physiotherapist (Physiotherapist B) stopped providing physiotherapy services at the practice location.
Investigation
The patient reported that they were not informed that Physiotherapist B left the practice location, nor were they provided with alternative treatment options. The patient eventually located Physiotherapist B at their new practice location, however, the patient reported that their continuation of care had been disrupted by two weeks.
This investigation reviewed the steps taken or directed by Physiotherapist A, to ensure that the patient was appropriately and adequately advised of Physiotherapist B’s departure and what the patient’s options were for continuing care.
Evidence was obtained showing that an email was sent to each patient who had received treatment during the last two weeks of Physiotherapist B’s employment. The email informed each patient that Physiotherapist B was leaving the clinic, Physiotherapist B’s new practice location, and the patient’s options for continuation of care. Evidence was obtained showing that the email was sent to the patient who submitted this complaint.
The email was sent from the office manager’s email address.
Decision
The evidence supports that appropriate steps were taken to inform the patient of Physiotherapist B’s departure and their new practice location. It is unfortunate that the email was not opened or diverted to the patient’s ‘junk’ mail. However, there is no evidence of unprofessional conduct, and the complaint was dismissed.
Patients who were currently receiving care from Physiotherapist B were contacted, as well as patients who had appointments after Physiotherapist B had left the clinic.
Note: The Leaving a Practice Guideline recommends that patients who do not have an appointment scheduled nor a current plan for follow-up, should be treated as discharged and follow normal clinic procedures regarding the completion of discharge summaries and records. Unless the patient has consented to receiving promotional material from the clinic, patients who are not currently receiving care do not need to be advised that the physiotherapist who treated them in the past has left a clinic.
Case 2
Allegations
- On or between August 12, 2022 – October 6, 2022, Hardeep Virdi moved the sleeve of A.B.’s shirt to get a better look at the tattoo on her upper arm, and commented that it was a “pretty” tattoo or words to that effect;
- On or about October 6, 2022, while providing physiotherapy treatment to A.B.
Hardeep Virdi did one or more of the following:
- Commented that A.B. had on “cute” underwear while adjusting A.B.’s shorts down for the purpose of performing a physiotherapy technique;
- Discussed romantic relationships generally, including commenting to A.B. that you could not do a long-distance relationship.
Investigation
The evidence obtained during the investigation supported referral of this matter for a hearing.
Findings
The Hearing Tribunal accepted Hardeep Virdi’s Acknowledgment of Unprofessional Conduct in respect of allegations 1 and 2(a) and 2(b) and determined that these allegations had been proven and constituted unprofessional conduct. The Hearing Tribunal also confirmed that Allegations 1 and 2(a) met the definition of sexual misconduct as set out in the Health Professions Act.
Orders
- Hardeep Virdi’s practice permit with the College, and ability to practice physiotherapy in Alberta, shall be suspended for a period of 30 days, commencing fourteen (14) days after he receives a copy of the Hearing Tribunal’s written decision.
- Hardeep Virdi shall pay a fine of $2,500.00 (the “Fine”) to the College, due within 7 days after he receives a copy of the Hearing Tribunal’s written decision. The Fine must be paid to the College, whether or not Hardeep Virdi holds an active practice permit with the College, and the Fine is a debt owed to the College and if not paid, may be recovered by the College as an action of debt.
- Hardeep Virdi shall complete, at his own cost, the courses below. Hardeep Virdi shall provide the Complaints Director with a certificate confirming successful completion of the course within six months after he receives a copy of the Hearing Tribunal’s written decision:
- IPHE201 – Professionalism and Ethics for Healthcare Professionals (NAIT – Continuing Education); and
- Professional Boundaries 1-3 (Lifemark Health Group) the Joint Submission on Sanction.
- The Orders set out above at paragraphs 2-3 shall appear as conditions (the “Conditions”) on Virdi’s practice permit and on the public register. The Conditions shall be removed once the Orders are deemed satisfied by the Complaints Director.
- Decision of the Hearing Tribunal on allegations and sanctions (posted December 19, 2023)
