f STATE OF FLORIDA oI y DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH N 3 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Petitioner, vs. Case No. 1999-51553 ROBERT TINSLEY “Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Department of Health, hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner,” files - this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Podiatric Medicine against ROBERT TINSLEY, hereinafter referred to as “Respondent,” and alleges: 1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of podiatric medicine pursuant to Section 20.43, Chapter 456 (formally Chapter 455 Part Tl, see Chapter 2000-160, Laws of Florida), and Chapter 461, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to the authority of Section 20.43(3)(g); Florida Statutes, Petitioner has contracted with the Agency for Health Care Administration to provide consumer complaint, investigative and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality Assurance, councils, or boards. 2. Respondent is, and has been at all time material hereto, a licensed podiatrist in the State of Florida, having been issued license number PO 001521. Respondent’s last known address is 964. S. Wickham Road, #2, Melbourne, FL 32904. anny 1 7 an 3. On or about February 4, 1998 patient C.R.C (a minor) presented to Respondent with complaint of flat feet. Respondent’s diagnosis was bilateral congenital pes ‘plano valgus with Achilles equinus. 4. Respondent advised patient C.R.C. and his parents that surgery was necessary on both feet to alleviate patient C.R.C.’s condition. 5. Respondent did not first recommend conservative care for patient CRC, including physical therapy, prior to any attempt at surgical intervention. 6. On or about December 16, 1998 patient C.R.C. and his parents were seen by Respondent. Respondent's discussed the proposed surgery with patient CR.C. and his parents. At this time, both patient C.R.C and his parents indicated to Respondent that they preferred to have the initial surgical procedure on the Patient’s right foot. Patient C.R.C.’s mother signed an informed consent form, which identified the intended surgical site as being on the right foot. 7. On or about December 17, 1998, Respondent signed a “pre-op order sheet” indicating that the planned surgical site to be on the patient’s right foot. However, this was not communicated to the surgery center by Respondent’s office staff. 8. On or about December 18, 1998 patient C.R.C was admitted to HealthSouth Melbourne Surgery Center. In preparation for surgery, the Patient was brought to the operating room (O.R.) without properly verifying the site of the surgery as stated on the surgical consent form or verifying the “x” on the site. As a result, the incorrect surgical site was prepped and draped. 9. Consequently, Respondent performed surgery on the Patient’s left foot. Specifically, Respondent performed an Achilles lengthening, Evan’s calcaneal osteotomy, and Young’s suspension on patient C.R.C.’s left foot. 10. Respondent unreasonably treated patient C.R.C.’s complex foot problems with surgical procedures, without first exhausting appropriate non-surgical treatment, including: physical therapy, for patient C.R.C. prior to any attempt at surgical * intervention. 11. Respondent failed to adequately supervise his office staff's surgical scheduling procedures. 12. Respondent operated on the wrong extremity. COUNT I 13, Based on the foregoing, Respondent’s license to practice podiatric medicine in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 461.013(1)(1) by failing to keep written medical records justifying the course of treatment of the patient, including, but not limited to, patient histories, examination results and test results. COUNT II 14, Petitioner realleges and incorporates the allegations contained in paragraphs one (1) through twelve (12). vs 15. Based on the foregoing, Respondent’s license to practice podiatric medicine in the State of Florida is subject to discipline pursuant to Section 461.013(1)(n) by performing professional services which have not been duly authorized by the patient or client or her or his legal representative, except as provided in ss. 743.064, 766.103, and 768.13, Florida Statutes. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Podiatric Medicine to enter an order imposing one or more of the following penalties: revocation or suspension of the Respondent’s license, restriction of the Respondent’s practice, imposition of an administrative fine and assessment of costs related to investigation and prosecution of this case (including, but not limited to costs associated with attorney time), issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, and/or any other " yelief that the Board deems appropriate. ~ SIGNED this | heey of LOMeamlae, 2000. Robert G. Brooks, M.D. BY: Naficy M. Snurkowski, ChieKAttomey Agency for Health Care Administration Office of General Counsel-MQA Practitioner Regulation-Legal COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER: Michael P. Sasso, Senior Attomey DEP, FILED Fla. Bar No: 167363 DEPUTY CLERK Agency for Health Care Administration ns General Counsel-MQA CLERK ehi Re Ae Hor Practitioner Regulation-Legal DATE tf [24 220. P.O. Box 14229 Tallahassee, Florida 32317-4229 Telephone: (850) 487-9670 Case No. PO 1999-51553 (Tinsley) aL PCP: ‘+ Shekel ent x PCP Date: Uf 2 J ho 4 soaagrermaenie

Docket for Case No: 01-000396PL