David Osiagwu
Please note that the decision can take up to 5 working days to be uploaded onto the HCPTS website. Please contact one of our Hearings Team Managers via tsteam@hcpts-uk.org or +44 (0)808 164 3084 if you require any further information.
Allegation
During your employment as a Band 6 Biomedical Scientist with Royal Berkshire NHS Trust from 1 August 2008 until 7 April 2010, you;
1. On the 26 November 2009 altered slide number 22031 to 22037 and did not recognise that the tissue type on this slide did not match that described on the request form which could have resulted in a patient being diagnosed with the condition of another patient.
2. On the 4 March 2010 whilst processing a frozen section, swapped two pieces of tissue over in error and put them into wrongly labelled cassettes.
3. On the 5 March 2010 whilst performing a frozen section altered the labelling system part way through the process, causing a subsequent mis-match which could have resulted in a patient receiving the wrong treatment.
4. Failed to complete work in a timely manner.
5. Required a level of supervision not appropriate for your banding or experience.
6. Demonstrated repeated poor performance even after a period of supervised practice.
7. Generated three adverse incident reports in regards to clinical near misses.
8. The matters set out in paragraphs 1-7 constitute misconduct and/or a lack of competence.
9. By reason of that misconduct and/or lack of competence, your fitness to practise as a registered health professional is impaired.
Finding
Background And Reasons
1. On 6 April 2011, the Applicant’s name was struck off the HCPC Register of Biomedical Scientists following the above allegations being found proved by a Conduct and Competence Committee.
2. By an application dated 10 February 2021, the Applicant applied to be restored to the Register. His initial restoration hearing was heard on 30 May 2022 and was adjourned due to technical issues. The restoration hearing has now been re-listed before this Panel on 28 October 2022.
3. The Applicant attended remotely from Nigeria, where he is now based and was not represented. The HCPC was represented by Ms Diana Sampson. During the course of the presentation of the evidence, the Panel heard additional oral evidence by video link from Mr Adam Mawson, HCPC registration manager. His evidence concerned the process involved and the formal requirements required for an application for Re-entry to the HCPC register.
4. Mr Mawson told the Panel that a person who had been off the register for more than 5 years was required to produce evidence of 60 days of “updating training” which could take the form of supervised practice, formal studies or private study (which could not be more than 30 days). Mr Mawson produced a copy of the updating training form which must be filled in by all applicants applying for re-entry after being off the register for more than five years. Mr Mawson confirmed that 60 days updating training must have taken place within the 24 months from any application for restoration or re-entry to the register. He confirmed that this form requires a signature from a person registered on the same part of the register as the applicant that the updating training has been completed satisfactorily and also requires the signature from a person who is HCPC registered.
5. Following Mr Mawson’s evidence, the Legal Assessor requested time to discuss this new evidence with the Applicant and Ms Sampson which was granted. After the hearing resumed, the Applicant made submissions to the fact that he had been unaware of the updating training requirements and had not seen the additional updating training form before Mr Mawson’s evidence. The Applicant made an application to be allowed to withdraw his restoration application which would enable him to make a new application with all the required paperwork in place in due course.
6. The Panel received and accepted the advice of the Legal Assessor and considered whether to allow the Applicant’s application to withdraw his restoration application. The Panel bore in mind its duty to protect the public and to be fair both to the HCPC and to the Applicant who was represented. Ms Sampson on behalf of the HCPC did not oppose the application and deferred to the Panel’s judgement.
7. The Panel decided to allow the application for this restoration application to be withdrawn. The Panel considered that no public protection considerations arose given that the Applicant is currently not on the register. The Panel also noted that the application was not opposed and that the Applicant had been given time to discuss the matter with the Legal Assessor and Ms Sampson before making the application. The Panel considered that fairness required that the Applicant should have the opportunity to provide all of the required information before making an application so that it would not be dismissed on a technicality nor without the merits of the application being carefully considered.
8. For these reasons, the Panel granted the application and noted that the application for restoration has been withdrawn.
Order
No information currently available
Notes
Application Withdrawn
Hearing History
History of Hearings for David Osiagwu
Date | Panel | Hearing type | Outcomes / Status |
---|---|---|---|
28/10/2022 | Conduct and Competence Committee | Restoration Hearing | Other |
03/05/2022 | Conduct and Competence Committee | Restoration Hearing | Adjourned |