|
Medical Professionals (RHPA) - Medical Records. Kodsi v. Health Professionals Appeal and Review Board
In Kodsi v. Health Professionals Appeal and Review Board (Ont Divisional Ct, 2025) the Divisional Court dismissed a JR, here where the "HPARB upheld the decision of the screening committee, the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee, of the Royal College of Dental Surgeons".
Here the court focusses on the legal status of a dentist's dental records:[2] Following the College’s investigation into the complaint, which included receiving and considering three responses from Dr. Kodsi, the Committee rendered its decision. It raised several concerns about Dr. Kodsi’s practice. The Committee noted, for example, that the information included in Dr. Kodsi’s responses were not fully supported by the records. The Committee also expressed concern about Dr. Kodsi’s post-surgical management of the patient and his consideration of the pre-surgical CT scan. Finally, the Committee concluded Dr. Kodsi should have followed the patient more closely given the CT findings and her complaints of pain, rather that telling her to return if needed. The Committee ordered Dr. Kodsi to complete a specified continuing education or remediation program (SCERP) in oral surgery, with a mentorship component, and required him to have his practice monitored.
[3] HPARB upheld the Committee’s decision. It found the Committee’s decision to be reasonable and its investigation to be adequate.
[4] In this court, Dr. Kodsi focused on a single submission: that the Committee and HPARB’s decisions should be quashed because the remedy was overbroad and did not reasonably follow from the Committee’s concerns. Dr. Kodsi submits those concerns were primarily about record-keeping and communication. Despite what he describes as the narrow focus of the Committee’s concerns, the SCERP required continuing education and remediation on a wide range of topics relevant to multiple aspects of his practice.
[5] We do not find any basis to interfere in HPARB’s decision. HPARB reasonably rejected the submission that the Committee’s concerns were limited to record-keeping and communication for the following reasons.
[6] First, HPARB explained that the concern about Dr. Kodsi’s record-keeping and communication reflected broader concerns about his practice. At para. 50 of its reasons it emphasized that, in the absence of compelling information, dental records are treated as an accurate reflection of what occurred:... [D]ental records are legal documents that all dentists are required to make. Dental records provide a contemporaneous record of interactions with a patient, made prior to the commencement of any complaint or legal process. As such, in the absence of compelling information to the contrary, dental records are a reliable source of information as to what occurred during the patient encounter. [7] HPARB therefore read the Committee’s comments about record-keeping to reflect not only a concern about documentation, but also about Dr. Kodsi’s substantive practice. This was a reasonable reading of the Committee’s decision and a fair reflection of the role and importance of record-keeping.
|
