BackgroundThe identification of health care professionals who are incompetent, impaired, exploitative or have criminal intent is important for public safety. It is unclear whether psychiatrists are more likely to commit medical misconduct offences than non-psychiatrists, and if the nature of these offences is different.AimThe aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of psychiatrists disciplined in Canada and the nature of their offences and disciplinary sentences for the ten years from 2000 through 2009 to other physicians disciplined during that timeframe.MethodsUtilizing a retrospective cohort design, we constructed a database of all physicians disciplined by provincial licensing authorities in Canada for the ten years from 2000 through 2009. Demographic variables and information on type of misconduct violation and penalty imposed were also collected for each physician disciplined. We compared psychiatrists to non-psychiatrists for the various outcomes.ResultsThere were 82 (14%) psychiatrists of 606 physicians disciplined in Canada in the ten years from 2000 through 2009, double the national proportion of psychiatrists. Of those disciplined psychiatrists, 8 (9.6%) were women compared to 29% in the national cohort. A total of 5 (6%) psychiatrists committed at least two separate offenses, accounting for approximately 11% of the total violations. A higher proportion of psychiatrists were disciplined for sexual misconduct (OR 3.62 [95% Confidence Interval [CI] 2.45–5.34]), fraudulent behavior (OR 2.32 [95% CI 1.20–4.40]) and unprofessional conduct (OR 3.1 [95% CI 1.95–4.95]). As a result, psychiatrists had between 1.85–4.35 greater risk of having disciplinary penalties in almost all categories in comparison to other physicians.ConclusionPsychiatrists differ from non-psychiatrist physicians in the prevalence and nature of medical misconduct. Efforts to decrease medical misconduct by psychiatrists need to be conducted and systematically evaluated.

An EDS program can be used by housestaff to more easily create hospital discharge summaries, and there was no difference in PCP satisfaction.

Purpose Previous studies discussing the risk of medical misconduct amongst anesthesiologists differ in their conclusions. In Canada, there is a paucity of data regarding demographic information, disciplinary findings, and penalties received by anesthesiologists. The aim of this study was to identify potential characteristics for discipline within the specialty of anesthesiology by ascertaining disciplinary findings and types of penalties received by anesthesiologists and comparing these with cases of disciplinary action against other Canadian physicians. Methods Using a retrospective cohort design, we constructed a database of all Canadian physicians disciplined by their respective provincial and territorial regulatory colleges between 2000-2011. We collected and compared physician demographic information, types of disciplinary findings, and penalties received by anesthesiologists and other physicians during that time period. Results Between 2000-2011, various physicians were disciplined 721 times in Canada. Nine anesthesiologists were found guilty of 11 (1.5%) disciplinary findings. One anesthesiologist was disciplined three separate times. All anesthesiologists subject to discipline were males, ten (90.9%) were independent practitioners, and almost twothirds (63.6%) were international medical graduates. The most common types of disciplinary findings were related to

BackgroundWhen the number of patients requiring hospital admission exceeds the number of available department-allotted beds, patients are often placed on a different specialty's inpatient ward, a practice known as “bedspacing”. Whether bedspacing affects quality of patient care has not been previously studied.MethodsWe reviewed consecutive general internal medicine (GIM) admissions for congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and pneumonia at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto, Canada, from 2007 to 2011 and examined whether quality of care differs between bedspaced and nonbedspaced patients. We matched each bedspaced patient with a GIM ward patient admitted on the same call shift with the same diagnosis. The primary outcome was the ratio of the actual to the estimated length of stay (ELOS). General and disease specific measures for CHF, COPD, and pneumonia (e.g. fluid restriction) were evaluated, as well as 30-day Emergency Department (ED) and hospital readmissions.ResultsOverall, 1639 consecutive admissions were reviewed, and 39 matched pairs for CHF, COPD and pneumonia were studied. Differences in both general and disease specific care measures were not detected between groups. For many disease-specific comparisons, ordering and adherence to quality of care indicators was low in both groups.ConclusionsWe were unable to detect differences in quality of care between bedspaced and nonbedspaced patients. As high patient volumes and hospital overcrowding remains, bedspacing will likely continue. More research is required in order to determine if quality of care is compromised by this ongoing practice.