Get all your news in one place
100’s of premium titles. One news app. Zero ads. Just $10 per month.
Nottingham Post

Doctor's fitness to practice still impaired after failing to treat patients at King's Mill Hospital

A doctor who practiced at King's Mill Hospital in Sutton in Ashfield whose fitness to practice was found to be impaired by a tribunal, has had the period extended by 10 months. According to a document from the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS), which runs hearings to find if medical professionals are fit to practice, Dr Tarek Seda practiced as a specialty doctor in emergency medicine at King's Mill.

That document states Dr Seda failed to adhere to his allocated break times and that he failed to carry out several actions required for the assessment and treatment of patients. It also states he created a false certificate of employment purporting to be from Doctorcall Medical Services and submitted this to the Dataflow Group.

Initial concerns were raised by Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Trust, which runs King's Mill, with the General Medical Council (GMC) on July 20 2017. Following an internal investigation, concerns were found about record keeping, clinical management and conduct.

During a tribunal on December 19 2019, Dr Seda admitted and the tribunal found proved the entirety of the allegation, apart from one the GMC withdrew. It found his fitness to practice was impaired by reason of misconduct and dishonesty, and his registration was suspended for 12 months.

Read more: Police use stinger to stop van after machine allegedly stolen

A further hearing on December 16, 2020 found his fitness to practice remained impaired, but determined "an order of suspension was now unnecessary and disproportionate, and it determined to replace the order of suspension with an order of conditions". An early review of this was requested by Dr Seda, but after giving evidence during a hearing on Friday (May 13), the tribunal found his fitness to practice is still impaired, and this was extended for 10 months.

That's because the document states the tribunal had not received evidence Dr Sada "demonstrated the extent to which he has remediated and that he is safe to return to unrestricted practice". "In addition, the tribunal considered that public confidence would be undermined if a finding of impairment were not made in a case such as this."