Connecticut Department of Public Health panel schedules fact-finding after nurse testifies in medication-disposal case

A Department of Public Health panel on Oct. 15 heard testimony in a disciplinary proceeding against Delia Sienna, a registered nurse accused of failing to secure and properly dispose of multiple home-health patients’ medications and of breaching patient confidentiality.

Panel members heard testimony from the department's counsel, statements from drug control personnel and a DEA investigator referenced in exhibits, and an extended statement and cross-examination of Sienna. The department asked the panel to find that the respondent failed to properly maintain patient medications and asked that the panel revoke her nursing license; the panel instead scheduled a separate fact-finding meeting to review the record and reach factual determinations.

Why this matters: disciplinary findings and any sanction against a licensed nurse involve public-safety and professional-regulation questions and can affect continuity of care for patients served by home-health providers.

The department’s closing argument, presented by department counsel Attorney Fezzina, said the respondent “admitted to the allegation in paragraph 7” (failure to properly dispose of medications from approximately May 2024 through Jan. 6, 2025) and that the department’s evidence — including personnel records and affidavits in Department Exhibits 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9 — met the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. Fezzina also cited an affidavit by Alyssa Daigle and testimony from Drug Control Agent Pamela Jones and a DEA investigator documenting medications recovered and chain-of-possession events.

Sienna told the panel she has been a nurse for 33 years and repeatedly denied diverting or selling medications. “I have never had any written warning or verbal warning regarding my disposal of medications,” she said in her statement, and described a year-long personal hardship after a house fire that left many of her possessions packed in her car. She said some medications in her vehicle were expired or intended for disposal and that she frequently used a State Police med-disposal drop at Troop K. She also said a nephew, Nathan Gilbert, had access to her home and car, and she obtained a protective order against him.

Evidence cited by the department included: an employer investigation dated Jan. 6, 2025; an affidavit from Alyssa Daigle describing a medication tied to a former patient discharged on or about Sept. 8, 2022; and drug-control reports indicating medications were turned over on or about Sept. 18, 2024 and during a Jan. 6, 2025 search of Sienna’s vehicle. Sienna told the panel she voluntarily submitted a fingernail drug test that was negative and said she paid roughly $600 for the test.

Panel process and next steps: the chair explained that fact-finding requires the panel to review each paragraph of the statement of charges and determine whether the department met the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard under Connecticut law. The panel agreed to hold fact-finding on Friday, Oct. 24, 2025, at 9:30 a.m.; Lisa (panel member) volunteered to do fact finding and the court reporter will be present. The chair also explained that, following fact-finding, the panel will prepare a proposed memorandum of decision and that remedies under Connecticut General Statutes § 19a-17 may include revocation, suspension, probation, reprimand or other sanctions.

What was decided at the hearing: the panel declined to delay closing arguments further to wait for one witness who was briefly absent and instead proceeded with the department’s closing argument and the respondent’s closing statement. The panel did not make final factual findings or impose discipline at the Oct. 15 session; those determinations will be made at or following the Oct. 24 fact-finding meeting and in a proposed memorandum of decision.

Context: participants discussed home-health practice in the wake of COVID-19 and how disposal practices changed, with some witnesses and the respondent saying agencies and pharmacies altered handling of returned medications. The transcript contains claims and counterclaims about how often Sienna used the police med-disposal drop and whether employer policies required immediate documentation when medications were removed from a patient’s home; the panel will weigh those records and testimony during fact-finding.

Panel remarks at the close of the session emphasized transparency in the fact-finding process: members must identify exhibits and testimonial bases for credibility determinations on the record. The respondent was told she will receive a proposed memorandum of decision and will have an opportunity to comment before the full board considers adopting it as final.