Almost all of these cases are completely archived except for one file - that file is usually the ruling by the judge. In this case, someone archived the ruling that rebuked the Missouri State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts on every one of their 137 charges. However, the claim can still be found at https://archive.org/details/Medical-Board-vs-Paskon. #Healthcare
Case No.: #02-1491 HA
Title: State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts vs. Paskon, M.D., Seth
his report, from Missouri, describes the repeated failure of the State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts (SBRHA) in distinguishing safe and effective coronary artery stenting from unnecessary stenting.
state medical boards (SMBs
d to ensure that only competent physicians are practicing medicine and that those physicians act in a professional manner
According to Chaudhry et al., physicians are given due process by SMBs [1,9]. However, this report of fraudulent or fraud-like regulation by the SBRHA demonstrates that licensees are not always afforded the “luxury” of due process.
This report describes the numerous efforts to discipline interventional cardiologist, Antoine Adem, MD, by the Missouri (MO) State Board of Registration for the Healing Arts (SBRHA)
The SBRHA cited no peer-reviewed literature or scholarly work in support of their claims of negligent patient care.
legislatively establish
filed blatantly dishonest
ried to conceal the exculpatory deposition of Dr. Tobis
The SBRHA
scientifically unmeritorious claims alleging unsafe patient care in court
ntentionally mischaracterized the medical records reviewed by Dr. Kern
“to punish or penalize in order to train and control
definition of discipline
is it concerning that none of the eight doctors on the SBRHA demonstrated sufficient medical knowledge to either know that Dr. Adem’s provision of care was appropriate or to learn that it was appropriate
The physicians of the MO SBRHA have repeatedly demonstrated
misrepresentation
ignoranc
attempted concealme
regulatory miscondu
fraud
ineffective communication
gross negligence
Further investigation and study of regulatory misconduct by SMBs is critical to determine its extent and impact.
This article provides novel insight into the quality of medical regulation by the Missouri Board of Registration for the Healing Arts. This article raises critical questions about the efficacy and integrity of a state medical board and suggests that further study is needed to evaluate the extend of regulatory misconduct.
Dr. Kent was performing spinal surgery at Lancaster General. Dr. Mathews was listed as a co-surgeon for the operation. During the procedure, a high speed drill slipped and tore the patient's esophagus.
27 of the 208
Mr. Robert Katana, President and CEO of Columbia Hospital, discovered the application did not contain a reappointment reference from Lancaster Genera
unity from 632*632 monetary damages under § 11111(a) of the Health Care Quality Improvement Act. The district court also granted summary judgmen
Rationale for Professional Regulation
From a public policy perspective, the rationale for professional regulation of medicine is patient protection [1]. Patients generally lack the knowledge, skills, or judgment to diagnose or treat disease and, thus, have strong incentives to rely on caregivers with specialized expertise
a longtime military contractor, acting after a string of Army medical students testified that Dr. John Hagmann had subjected them to dangerous experiments and sexual exploitation.
it demonstrates that for those reported to medical boards, the peer review process disciplines those with less training or the inability to qualify for or pass certification requirements.
This study about medical regulation in Missouri details the numerous errors in evaluating the care provided by Dr. Antoine Adem. The state medical board tried to discipline the cardiologist's medical license for allegedly providing negligent and unsafe patient care. Unfortunately, what this article highlights, is that it was not Dr. Adem who failed ot use his skills and knowledge in the duties of the profession, but it was the members of the Missouri Board of Registration for the Healing Arts who failed to demonstrate competent medical knowledge and sufficient skills to properly evaluate the medical care provided by their licensees. If a physician on the medical board is unable to evaluate the care provided by a licensee, then they may pose a danger to the public due to their incompetence and, at the very least, should be second-guessed.