State Board of Medical Licensure clears physician assistant to return to practice under supervision and 12-month probation

The State Board of Medical Licensure, meeting in executive session, found a physician assistant guilty of failing to comply with an April 9 examining committee order and determined the PA fit to return to clinical practice, the board announced.

The action resolved four issues the board had placed before itself during the executive session: the finding of guilt on the April 9 order; whether the PA is fit to return to practice (the board answered yes); whether the temporary action pending a hearing should be lifted (the board answered yes); and how long any probation or conditions should run, given the PA had been suspended since 05/16/2024.

"We found a defendant guilty," Dr. Kennard, a member of the State Board of Medical Licensure, said when announcing the board's findings. Reading the board's order, Dr. Kennard set out specific conditions for the PA's reinstatement: "Follow all terms of the NPHP contract as stated...follow all return to work provisions stated in the IOP and MHP reports, recommendations...direct supervision for the first 25 patient encounters after securing employment." The board added a 12-month probationary period.

The board's written terms, as read during the meeting, require compliance with an NPHP contract (as referenced by the board), adherence to return-to-work provisions summarized in IOP and MHP reports, and direct supervision for the first 25 patient encounters after the PA secures employment. The board also noted the PA's suspension beginning 05/16/2024 when discussing the length and nature of monitoring.

Comments made to the PA after the decision stressed support for recovery and monitoring rather than further immediate sanction. A board member addressing the licensee said recovery is a process of "discovery" and offered the board's assistance and the executive director as a point of contact. Another board member, Miss Ruffin, congratulated the licensee on progress during the recovery process.

The board did not record a roll-call vote in the public transcript for the decision announced in executive session. The action was described as a final decision reached by the board in executive session and conveyed orally to the licensee and those present.

After completing the disciplinary matter the board moved on to scheduling and administrative items, confirming tentative board meeting dates in May and asking members to check availability; staff and board members exchanged thanks for meeting logistics before adjourning.

The board's decision and its conditions will apply as stated; further details about monitoring, reporting requirements, or enforcement steps (for example, who will verify compliance with the NPHP contract or how employers must report supervised encounters) were not specified in the public portions of the transcript.