Sunshine Coast doctor Hugo Pin reprimanded for leaving catheter in leg

A Sunshine Coast doctor has been reprimanded for leaving a 9.2cm catheter tube and 47cm optical fibre cable inside a patient during a varicose vein procedure.

Hugo Pin, medical director of Sunshine Vein Clinic at Peregian Beach, was reprimanded for professional misconduct and unsatisfactory professional performance in a recently released finding from the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

The tribunal was told that Dr Pin, 58, knew a segment of the catheter was retained in the female patient’s leg during the procedure but did not tell her.

The tribunal was also told that a 47cm length of optical fibre became detached and was also still in the patient’s leg after the procedure.

The QCAT finding relates to the treatment of a varicose vein on a patient’s right leg in May 2013 and follow-up care by Dr Pin, who the tribunal was told admitted to the seven allegations arising from the incident.

The endovenous laser ablation procedure involved a guide wire and catheter being inserted in the saphenous vein of the patient, both of which were damaged during the procedure.

The tribunal was told that Dr Pin, who is also known as Hughes Pin, observed damage to the end of the catheter and was aware that some portion of the catheter had been retained in the patient’s leg but was not aware of the detachment and retention of the optical fibre.

The patient twice contacted Dr Pin’s practice after the procedure to complain of significant pain in the groin area and lower leg, but the tribunal was told that Dr Pin did not contact the patient himself or advise her of the piece of catheter still in her leg.

She also saw Dr Pin 11 days after the procedure for a scheduled review, but the tribunal was told that he again didn’t tell her he knew the catheter was still in her leg.

On May 29, 2013, 27 days after the procedure, the patient pulled the 47cm long plastic wire from her leg.

She then went to her GP where an ultrasound revealed the 9.2cm catheter still in her saphenous vein in the calf before a 9.8cm length of tubing was removed by a radiologist 40 days after the procedure.

“The unsatisfactory professional performance the subject of allegation 1 was a serious departure from the standard of care expected of a medical practitioner of the respondent’s qualifications and experience,” the QCAT finding read.

“It was something which could have been easily avoided by the exercise of reasonable care.

“The professional misconduct the subject of allegations 2 to 7 is a serious example of a failure to adhere to professional standards for the communication to patients of adverse events so that the patient can make an informed decision as to their healthcare.

“It was not for the respondent to decide that it was better for the patient that she not know of the adverse event.”

The tribunal said it was difficult for them to accept that Dr Pin had acted in such a way because of concerns for the patient and it was more likely “motivated by a desire for self-protection and a hope that the problem might just not emerge”.

“It is more likely than not that the respondent was motivated by his own self-interest rather than any genuine concern for the patient in his decision not to disclose the truth to her,” the finding read.

The tribunal said the French-trained Dr Pin had taken steps to avoid the conduct happening again and had undertaken education in clinical skills in such procedures and his knowledge of appropriate disclosure of adverse events since the incident.

He was only reprimanded over the incident partly because of an eight-year delay in the Health Ombudsman concluding the disciplinary matter.

The patient was also given an undisclosed compensation payout from the practice.

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7r7HWrGWcp51jrrZ7y6Kdnqukrrmme8eemKWsmGS1pq3LrZ9mqKKkr62xzKxmrK2eqLWqusRmmqiZo6l6pbvCraarZZiqtLB5z6KlZqqVpb%2BqucCnm56cXZfGbr3Cmqtmp6aav264xJqtoqaXYrCiwMeeq56qXZ67brzAraCepqSoeq2xxmilnq%2BjYsC1u9GyZptsZG2EenyUapmfnmBnfqWylpxnb51gZoJ0fZBrnJ%2Ba