On January 23, 2020 the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) referred a matter involving Usama Ragheb to the Discipline Committee for a hearing. 

The hearing took place on March 31, 2021. This matter was resolved by way of an Agreed Statement of Facts and a Joint Submission on Penalty and Cost.

Finding

The Discipline Committee issued a decision on the finding on March 31, 2021, on penalty on March 31, 2021 and on costs on March 31, 2021. 

After having considered all of the evidence, a panel of the Discipline Committee found Usama Ragheb to have committed the following acts of professional misconduct:

•  paragraph 1 (failing to maintain the standards of practice of the profession)
• paragraph 18 (engaging in conduct or performing an act relevant to the practice of the profession that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional)
• paragraph 26 (failing to keep records in accordance with the standards of practice of the profession)
  
  

Penalty

The panel of the Discipline Committee ordered the following penalty. That Usama Ragheb:

• Receive a reprimand at the conclusion of the hearing (delivered on March 31, 2021).
• Serve a suspension for the period of April 10, 2021 through to and including October 9, 2021. The suspension could be extended if they are unable to complete certain requirements.
• Complete a review of various College, standards, tools and resources.
• Successfully complete the ProBe program.
• Meet with a practice coach on no more than eight occasions.
• The physiotherapist may not supervise physiotherapy students and/or physiotherapy assistant (PTA) students.
• The physiotherapist may not be a practice supervisor for a physiotherapist who holds a provisional practice certificate of registration. 
• The physiotherapist may not provide physiotherapy services as a physiotherapist assistant (PTA) during the period that his certificate of registration is suspended. 

The panel also ordered Usama Ragheb to pay costs to the College in the amount of $3,000 to offset some of the costs associated with investigating and prosecuting this case.

As a part of the penalty the Committee also issued a reprimand which read as follows:

The panel has found that you engaged in significant professional misconduct, and by doing so, you have adversely affected the reputation of the physiotherapy profession. 

Your conduct was unprofessional and lacked the required respect for patient boundaries, appropriate considerations when treating sensitive areas and, by your own admission, lacked appropriate consent. Your actions harmed an individual, and actions such as those undermine the public confidence in physiotherapists. 

Mr. Ragheb, while we acknowledge your statements today, the findings of professional misconduct are serious. It is the panel’s hope that your stated commitment to your remediation is followed through with and will result in a positive change to your practice. 

We expect that when you resume your practice as a physiotherapist, you are acutely aware of your patient’s needs and always put the needs of your patient before your own. Further, we expect that you will never appear before a Discipline Committee panel again.

You can read the full decision of the Discipline Committee of the College of Physiotherapists of Ontario at: www.canlii.ca