Performance Review of a Clinician Following Concerns

Iodem commenced a service and review contract. A subcontract outlined was to carry out an investigation into allegations of poor performance by a non-consultant grade hospital doctor. It was alleged that that the doctor had significantly mismanaged three patients, placing them at potential risk of harm as a consequence of his actions. It was agreed that a performance assessment would be undertaken.

Iodem assembled a team of independent assessors, consisting of experts in performance reviews and the related specialties. The doctor was invited to take part in the assessment. The doctor had been reported to the relevant national medical council shortly before the investigation and so the council requested a copy of the report.

The assessment went ahead with the following methodology:

1. Case note review of 50 cases chosen at random but to include both in-patients and out-patients.
2. Interview with his peers and supervising consultants, using a structured interview process.
3. Review of the three cases that were reported as being a cause for concern about the doctor’s practice.

The review concluded that there was no evidence to indicate serious under performance in the role that the doctor held, or that there was any issue of patient safety. In particular, as one consultant had requested a recall of the doctor’s patients, the Iodem review was able to robustly provide evidence that there was no need to alarm public confidence with a patient recall.

Iodem was also able to suggest mechanisms to support and improve team working, including strategies to promote dignity at work.