Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE
Respondent: BEN A. RAINES, D.O.
Judges: ROBERT E. MEALE
Agency: Department of Health
Locations: Clearwater, Florida
Filed: Jan. 26, 2000
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Tuesday, October 17, 2000.
Latest Update: Dec. 24, 2024
woe U VU
Tk tay
STATE OF FLORIDA bow dL
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION CO Jay on ps
BOARD OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE AN eG PM Bhs
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION,
PETITIONER,
vs. CASE NO. 93-06650
BEN A. RAINES, D.O.,
RESPONDENT.
/
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT
COMES NOW the Petitioner, Agency for) Health Care
Administration, hereinafter referred to as "Petitioner," and files
this Administrative Complaint before the Board loft Osteopathic
Medicine against Ben A. Raines, D.O. hereinafter referred to as
"Respondent," and alleges:
1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating
the practice of osteopathic medicine pursuant to) Section 20.42,
Florida Statutes; Chapter 455, Florida Statutes; and Chapter 459,
Florida Statutes.
2. Respondent is and has been at all times material hereto
a licensed osteopathic physician in the State of Florida, having
been issued license number 0S 0001609. Respondent’s last known
address is P.O. Box 3690 Largo, Florida 34645-0690,
Facts Relating to Patient K.wW.
3. Patient K.W is a 65 year old male who was on Procardia
and Lopid when he called the Respondent’s office on April 20, 1992,
asking for a refill of his medication.
4. The Respondent proceeded to take him off both Procardia
and Lopid and put him on Clonidine .2 ml. The Respondent failed
to; ask Patient K.W. to come in for an examination or re-
evaluation, and ask for a medical history or any other medical
information from the patient.
5. On April 21, 1992, Patient K.W. called the Respondent
complaining of numbness, difficulty holding objects, blurred
vision, and muscle spasm about every half hour after taking the
medication. The patient was told by the Respondent to keep taking
Clonidine and to come in the follow day for a blood pressure check.
6. On April 22, 1992, Patient K.W. arrived at the
Respondent’s office for a blood pressure check. It was noted as
150/95. Laboratory examinations were also performed. These
examinations revealed(severe abnormalities including; Uric acid at
12.1, cholesterol 256, Iron 201, Hemogoblin 12.9, Hematocrit 37.0,
RBC’s 3.71, LDL 174.
7. On April 24, 1992, Patient K.W. called the Respondent’s
office stating that his previous symptoms haa dramatically
increased, and that his feet were numb. The Respondent instructed
him to continue to take Clonidine and that the symptoms would go
away pretty soon.
8. A reasonably prudent physician would lnave seen the
patient and re-evaluated the patients medical condition before
changing his medication.
U WU
9. However, the Respondent failed to examine the patient
before changing his medication, and failed to take into account the
patients complaints about the medications side effects.
10. Patient K.W. discontinued Clonidine on his own and began
to take medications that had been previously prescribed. The
patient later reported that all side effects had diminished since
he had stopped taking the medication given to him by the
Respondent.
COUNT. ONE
11. Petitioner realleges and incorporates pattagraphs one (1)
through ten (10), as if fully set forth herein this Count One.
12. Respondent is guilty of gross or repeated malpractice or
failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of care,
skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably prudent
similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under similar
conditions and circumstances in that Respondent failed to advise
the patient to visit his office for a re-evaluation of his medical
condition. The Respondent also changed the patients medication
without a proper medical examination, medical history and or
information.
13. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section
459.015(1) (x), Florida Statutes, by gross or repeated malpractice
or failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of
care, skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably
prudent similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under
similar conditions and circumstances.
U U
Facts Relating to Patient H.S.
14. Patient H.S., a sixty-six year old male, presented to
the Respondent on May 18, 1992. He had surgery for an open
reduction internal fixation of the left elbow. On May 15, 1992,
the orthopedic surgeon who performed the operation recommended that
Patient H.S. have follow-up care seven to ten days post operative
to include an orthopedic referral; removal of staples; and physical
therapy.
15. On May 18, 1992, the Respondent told Patient H.S. that he
could perform his follow-up treatment and that he would not refer
him to an orthopedic surgeon for follow-up care.
16. A reasonably prudent physician would have referred the
patient to a proper orthopedic surgeon for follow-up care and
treatment, referred the patient for physical therapy, removed the
staples within two weeks of the patients procedure, and followed
the operating surgeons instructions for follow-up care and
treatment.
17. However, the Respondent failed to follow the operating
surgeons instructions for follow up care, failed |to remove skin
staples which should have been removed within two weeks of the
procedure; refer Patient H.S. to an orthopedic surgeon; and failed
to refer Patient H.S. for physical therapy.
18. On June 29, 1992, Patient H.S. was seen by another
osteopathic physician who removed the staples immediately,
performed x-rays, and referred Patient H.S. to] an orthopedic
surgeon.
U U
COUNT TWO
19. Petitioner realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1)
through eighteen (18), as if fully set forth herein this Count Two.
20. Respondent is guilty of gross or repeated malpractice or
failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of care,
skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably prudent
similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under similar
conditions and circumstances in that Respondent failed to; follow
the operating surgeons instructions for follow up care, refer the
patient for physical therapy, remove skin staples, and refer the
patient to an orthopedic surgeon for follow-up care.
21. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section
459.015(1)(x), Florida Statutes, by gross or repeated malpractice
or failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of
care, skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably
prudent similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under
similar conditions and circumstances.
Facts Relating to Patient R.A. |
22. He was a seventy-three year old male, who had been
previously diagnosed with hearing loss associated with presbycusis
and tympanic membrane scars.
23. On May 21, 1992, Patient R.A. arrived at the Respondent’s
office complaining of eye and ear problems. After an initial
examination, the Respondent diagnosed him with possible retinal
detachment, presbycusis and tympanic membrane scars. The Respondent
WU U
noted that the patients left eye was dark and blurry, and he ruled
out retinal detachment.
24. A reasonably prudent physician would have determined that
the patient needed an immediate referral to a qualified
ophthalmologist and would have referred that patient to the
appropriate specialist.
25. The Respondent failed to realize the need for quick
action on his part and referred the patient to an ophthalmologist
eleven days after the initial diagnosis.
26. On June 29, 1992, Patient R.A. was seen by an
ophthalmologist who diagnosed him as having cystoid macular edema
and probable epiretinal membrane with the problem increasing. The
ophthalmologist also noted that Patient R.A. needed to see a
retinal specialist.
COUNT _ THREE
27. Petitioner realleges and incorporates patagraphe one (1)
through twenty-six (26), as if fully set forth herein this Count
Three.
28. Respondent is guilty of gross or repeated malpractice or
failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that) level of care,
skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably prudent
similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under similar
conditions and circumstances in that Respondent failed to refer the
patient to an adequate specialist within a reasonable amount of
time.
U U
29. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section
459.015(1) (x), Florida Statutes, by gross or repeated malpractice
or failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of
care, skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably
prudent similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under
similar conditions and circumstances.
Facts Relating to Patient V.R.
30. Patient V.R. was first seen by the Respondent on January
27, 1992. She was a seventy-year old female, with a known history
of diabetes, status post left carotid endarterectomy carotid
stenosis, a history of cerebral infarct left temporal lobe,
peripheral vascular occlusive disease, history of congestive heart
failure and mild C.0.P.D. These conditions had been under control
with numerous medications including Lasix 20mg, Potassium 10ml,
Glucotrol, Trental, and Lopid.
31. A reasonably prudent physician would) have examined
Patient V.R. and then adjusted the course of treatment based on the
test results.
32. The Respondent immediately discontinued all of the
medications Patient V.R. was taking, and failed to examine Patient
V.R. The Respondent also ordered several exams, but) failed to order
several basic exams including an EKG, audio test, and chest x-ray.
33. On June 26, 1992 Patient V.R. called the Respondent
complaining that her legs were swollen. Patient V.R. was advised
by the Respondent to take two Lasix tablets daily and continue with
a low fat diet as previously prescribed.
34. On May 26, 1992, Patient vV.R.
Respondent’s office complaining of a swollen leg.
returned to
the
The Respondent
prescribed Lasix 40 mg and Digoxin .25 qd and told her to return in
four months.
35. Patient V.R. was examined by the Respond
1992. The Respondent advised Patient V.R. to rema
the low fat diet, even though she only weighed
twenty nine pounds. The Respondent
congestive heart failure.
36.
1992. She complained of gas pains when walking
right leg. Patient V.R. was referred to a vascula
37. The vascular surgeon diagnosed Patient
venus thrombosis of both lower extremities, bilate
femoral artery occlusion and_ status post
ent on June 29,
in on Lasix and
one-hundred and
also diagnosed her with
Patient V.R. was seen again by the Respondent on July 2,
and pain in her
r surgeon.
V.R. with deep
ral superficial
left carotid
endarterectomy. Patient V.R. was started on Coumadin. The vascular
surgeon also recommended a weekly prothrombin
time, and non
invasive venous studies to confirm the diagnosis of deep vein
thrombosis.
38.
time, non invasive venous studies, and follow up v
39.
into the patients treatment plan.
The Respondent failed to integrate these r
The vascular surgeon recommended a weekly prothrombin
isits.
ecommendations
UO U
COUNT FOUR
40. Petitioner realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1)
through thirty-nine (39), as if fully set forth herein this Count
Four.
41. Respondent is guilty of gross or repeated malpractice or
failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of care,
skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably prudent
similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under similar
conditions and circumstances in that Respondent removed the Patient
from all medications with no apparent medical justification. The
Respondent also failed to properly examine the patient, failed to
adapt the course of treatment based on the patients test results,
and failed to follow the specialists recommendations for treatment.
42. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section
459.015(1)(x), Florida Statutes, by gross or repeated malpractice
or failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of
care, skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably
prudent similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under
similar conditions and circumstances.
Facts Relating to Patient I.H. |
43. Patient I.H. an eighty-four year old female, visited the
Respondent on September 16, 1991, complaining of weakness,
dizziness, and fatigue. A note was made on her records to obtain a
chest x-ray and a mammogram, however there is no documentation of
the tests being performed.
U U
44. A reasonably prudent physician would have
followed-up on
whether or not the appropriate examinations had been performed.
45. On February 24, 1992, Patient I.H.’ s daughter called the
Respondent complaining that her mother, Patient I.H.
was coughing,
dizzy, and was having difficulty breathing. The Respondent
prescribed Rondec and Digoxin over the phone with
no follow up
examination. In addition the Respondent failed to document the
phone call on the Patient’s medical records. The Respondent also
discontinued all of Patient I.H.’s previous medicat
46. A reasonably prudent physician would have
examined the patient before changing the course of
would have changed the course of treatment based on
ions.
appropriately
treatment, and
test results.
A prudent physician would have also documented all phone calls
dealing with the patient on her medical records.
COUNT FIVE
47. Petitioner realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1)
through fourty-six (46), as if fully set forth herein this Count
FIVE. |
48. Respondent is guilty of gross or repeated
failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that
malpractice or
level of care,
skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably prudent
similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable
under similar
conditions and circumstances in that Respondent failed to follow-up
on examinations that were needed but never performed, and failed to
re-evaluate the patient before changing her course of treatment.
10
49. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated Section
459.015(1)(x), Florida Statutes, by gross or repeated malpractice
or failure to practice osteopathic medicine with that level of
care, skill, and treatment which is recognized by a reasonably
prudent similar osteopathic physician as being acceptable under
similar conditions and circumstances.
WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of
Osteopathic Medicine 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, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the
Respondent on probation, the assessment of costs related to the
investigation and prosecution of this case, other than costs
associated with an attorney’s time, as provided |for in Section
455.227(3), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the
Board deems appropriate.
SIGNED this ow day of bree , 1996.
Douglas M. Co
FILED
AGENCY FOR
WEALTH CARE ADIINISTRATION
wo EPUTY CI
dentipre ey
vate_U-3 96
11
COUNSEL FOR AGENCY:
Francesca Plendl
Senior Attorney
Agency for Health Care Administration
1940 North Monroe Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750
Florida Bar #765996
FP/nb
PCP: February 29, 1996
Perez and Hand
12
Docket for Case No: 00-000436
Issue Date |
Proceedings |
Oct. 17, 2000 |
Order Closing File issued. CASE CLOSED.
|
Jun. 16, 2000 |
Order Continuing Case in Abeyance sent out. (parties to advise status by 9/15/00)
|
Jun. 15, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Status Report, Request for Further Period of Abeyance (filed via facsimile).
|
May 04, 2000 |
Letter to Judge Meale from M. Douglas Re: Response to subpoena dated 4/13/00 regarding medical claims information for R. Arnold filed. |
May 02, 2000 |
Letter to Judge Meale from M. Douglas Re: Enclosing a detailed description of how each claim received by Humana, Inc. was processed filed. |
Apr. 19, 2000 |
Order Granting Continuance and Placing Case in Abeyance sent out. (Parties to advise status by June 15, 2000.)
|
Apr. 18, 2000 |
Joint Motion to Abate (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 14, 2000 |
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss sent out.
|
Apr. 14, 2000 |
(B. Lamb) Motion to Dismiss (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 13, 2000 |
(Petitioner) Notice of Taking Deposition of Respondent`s Expert Witness (filed via facsimile). |
Apr. 13, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Motion for Status Conference (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 13, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Motion to Compel Disclosure and Testimony of Respondent`s Expert Witness (filed via facsimile). |
Apr. 12, 2000 |
Order Denying Motion to Bifurcate Hearing, Motion to Exclude Testimony of Respondent`s Expert Witness and Fourth Motion to Continue sent out.
|
Apr. 12, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s Motion to Dismiss (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 12, 2000 |
(M. Holz) Notice of Attorney Unavailability (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 11, 2000 |
Response to Petitioner`s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Respondent`s Expert Witness (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 11, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Answers to Respondent`s Interrogatories (filed via facsimile). |
Apr. 11, 2000 |
(B. Lamb) Response to Petitioner`s Motion to Bifurcate Hearing (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 11, 2000 |
Fourth Motion to Continue (Respondent) (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 11, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Motion to Exclude Testimony of Respondent`s Expert Witness (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 10, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Motion to Bifurcate Hearing (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 10, 2000 |
(Petitioner) Revised Notice of Taking Deposition filed. |
Apr. 07, 2000 |
Notice of Taking Deposition (filed via facsimile). |
Apr. 07, 2000 |
Notice of Taking Deposition Tecum filed. |
Apr. 07, 2000 |
(Respondent) Notice of Filing filed.
|
Apr. 07, 2000 |
Order Denying Continuance sent out.
|
Apr. 07, 2000 |
(B. Lamb) Motion for Protective Order (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 07, 2000 |
Letter to B. Lamb from J. Williams Re: Motion for Protective Order (filed via facsimile). |
Apr. 07, 2000 |
Amended Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for April 27 and 28, 2000; 9:00 a.m.; Clearwater, FL, amended as to Dates)
|
Apr. 06, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s Third Motion to Continue (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 05, 2000 |
(Respondent) Third Motion to Continue (filed via facsimile).
|
Apr. 05, 2000 |
(Petitioner) Notice of Taking Deposition (filed via facsimile). |
Mar. 30, 2000 |
Order Denying Continuance sent out. (the second motion to continue is denied)
|
Mar. 27, 2000 |
(B. Lamb) Second Motion to Continue filed.
|
Mar. 24, 2000 |
Respondent, Ben A. Raines, D.O.`s Response to Petitioner`s Request for Production filed. |
Mar. 24, 2000 |
Respondent`s Response to Petitioner`s First Set of Interrogatories filed. |
Mar. 23, 2000 |
Order of Pre-hearing Instructions sent out.
|
Mar. 22, 2000 |
Petitioner`s Motion for Pre-Hearing Order (filed via facsimile).
|
Mar. 15, 2000 |
(B. Lamb) Second Request to Produce filed. |
Mar. 15, 2000 |
Order Denying Continuance sent out.
|
Mar. 13, 2000 |
(B. Lamb) Motion to Continue filed.
|
Feb. 23, 2000 |
(Respondent) Response to Request for Admissions filed. |
Feb. 15, 2000 |
Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for April 25 through 28, 2000; 9:00 a.m.; Clearwater, FL)
|
Feb. 11, 2000 |
Notice of Serving Petitioner`s First Set of Request for Admissions, Request for Production of Documents, and Interrogatories to Respondent filed. |
Feb. 11, 2000 |
Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
|
Jan. 31, 2000 |
Initial Order issued. |
Jan. 26, 2000 |
Administrative Complaint filed.
|
Jan. 26, 2000 |
Petition for Formal Hearing filed.
|
Jan. 26, 2000 |
Agency Referral Letter filed.
|