On April 28, 2014, a panel of the Discipline Committee of the College of Optometrists of British Columbia released a decision on penalty issuing a reprimand to Dr. Jerry Mackenzie of Vancouver, B.C. and suspending his registration for a period of three years. Dr. Mackenzie cannot, by law, practice optometry until April 27, 2017, and may not apply to return to practice following the expiration of the suspension period until he has completed a significant number of steps. Prior to reinstatement, Dr. Mackenzie must successfully complete courses on professional ethics and clinical record-keeping at his cost, permanently convert to an electronic record-keeping system, arrange for supervision of his practice and pay for that supervision with a requirement that the supervisor report to the College monthly on Dr. Mackenzie’s compliance with supervision, and cooperate with random chart audits at his cost for two years following return to practice. Dr. Mackenzie must also reimburse his patient the cost of the eye examination fee within 30 days, pay hearing costs in the amount of $13,005.75, and a fine in the amount of $10,000. This order of the Discipline Committee was made under section 39(2) and (8)(b) of the Health Professions Act.

On October 7, 2013, a Panel of the Discipline Committee found that Dr. Mackenzie contravened Standards of Conduct, a Consent Order dated March 9, 2010, and bylaws of the College, which conduct also constituted professional misconduct under section 39(1) of the Health Professions Act. In 2011, a patient filed a complaint alleging that Dr. Mackenzie had failed to conduct a proper eye examination when she presented with a complaint of deteriorating vision and failed to diagnose that she suffered from serious cataracts. Her general practitioner referred her to an ophthalmologist who immediately diagnosed that she had significant cataracts in her left eye. After the Inquiry Committee initiated an investigation, Dr. Mackenzie created a referral note to cover up the fact that he failed to refer the patient to a specialist and altered his clinical records to falsely show that he discussed a cataract with her. He provided a copy of the false referral form and the altered clinical records to the Inquiry Committee. The Discipline Committee panel found that Dr. Mackenzie failed to refer the patient to a specialist as required under Part 6 of the Standards of Practice, and altered his clinical record to falsely show that he discussed a cataract with the patient, and that this conduct constituted unethical conduct and professional misconduct.

March 9, 2010
COMPLAINT: A former employee filed a complaint against Dr. Mackenzie alleging that he engaged in improper billing of the Medical Services Plan and unprofessional conduct by rating the appearance of his female patients in his charts.

DESCRIPTION OF ACTION TAKEN: Following an investigation, the Inquiry Committee passed a motion to seek a consent order under s. 33(6) of the Health Professions Act from Dr. Mackenzie. The terms of the consent order, which was signed on March 9, 2010, require the Registrant to undertake to: (a) refrain from repeating the conduct of rating the appearance or any other aspect of his female patients in his clinical records; (b) undertake not to repeat conduct of performing incomplete or inadequate eye examinations; (c) refrain from the conduct of submitting inaccurate billings to Medical Services Plan; (d) undertake not to repeat the conduct of completing inaccurate clinical records; (e) receive training to improve his professional record-keeping from a supervisor/mentor appointed by the Quality Assurance Committee, at his own cost, within nine months of the date of the order; (f) attend a course on professional responsibility and ethics to be approved by the Inquiry Committee, at his own cost, within nine months of the date of the order; (g) consent to a reprimand in relation to his unprofessional conduct in relation to rating female patients, failure to maintain proper clinical records, failure to conduct complete and competent eye examinations and his inaccurate billing. The Registrant has also consented to random and scheduled audits, at his cost, by inspectors appointed by the Inquiry Committee for the next two year period for the purposes of ensuring that he is conducting competent eye examinations, completing proper clinical records and submitting accurate billing records to MSP and to pay the sum of $6,182.45 towards the College’s investigation costs.

REASONS FOR THE ACTION TAKEN: The Inquiry Committee determined that the complaint was substantiated. Dr. Mackenzie acknowledged that he used a rating system to rate the appearance of some of his female patients. He denied the other allegations. The Inquiry Committee conducted a review of the Registrant’s clinical records over a six month period. Those records revealed billing concerns and concerns with the adequacy of eye examinations being performed and the adequacy and accuracy of the Registrant’s clinical records. The Inquiry Committee considered the Registrant’s history of past action with the College and determined that this was an appropriate case to seek a consent order with comprehensive terms to protect public safety and to improve the Registrant’s standards of practice.