Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Professional Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State panel hears allegations that Gladeview APRN prescribed antipsychotics without proper authorization
Summary
A state practitioner-licensing panel heard the Department of Public Health’s claim that an APRN at Gladeview Health Center prescribed antipsychotic medications to a patient without adequately coordinating with the authorized health-care representative or other treating providers; the Department seeks discipline and presented medical records and expert reports under seal.
The Practitioner Licensing and Investigation panel on June 13 heard opening statements in a disciplinary case in which the Department of Public Health alleges that an advanced practice registered nurse at Gladeview Health Center prescribed antipsychotic medications for a patient without appropriate consultation and monitoring.
Department counsel said patient No. 1 was admitted to Gladeview on or about Dec. 3, 2021, after a stay at a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs hospital, and that the patient’s authorized health-care representative only learned in late December that psychiatric medications were being administered. "The Department contends that APRN Sheehan not only failed to discuss these medications with the patient's authorized health-care representative, she failed to consult with one or more medical providers who were treating patient number 1," Department counsel said during opening remarks, and asked the board to consider disciplining the nurse’s APRN license.
In response, defense counsel said the respondent, Ms. Sheehan, has spent her career caring for patients and will testify that she communicated with the health-care representative and that facility medical staff and an attending physician reviewed and signed off on medication changes. "This is an absolute witch hunt against someone who has dedicated their life to providing care and treatment in an appropriate manner," defense counsel said in an opening statement.
The panel resolved multiple evidentiary objections before opening statements. The panel overruled relevancy objections to Department Exhibit 3 but sustained foundational objections and admitted it for identification only pending authentication by a witness. Department Exhibit 4, described by counsel as Gladeview-provided medical records, was entered in full under seal. Other filings, including several expert reports and supplemental materials, were either entered under seal or retained as identification-only pending testimony.
The Department identified Dr. Jill Espelon, a board-certified psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner, as its expert witness. Dr. Espelon is expected to testify about standards of care for prescribing psychotropic medications, the Department said. Counsel for the respondent said the record contains discrepancies in dates and that Ms. Sheehan will explain her treatment decisions under oath.
The panel directed that sensitive pages containing address or other potentially private information be sealed. It also instructed that items admitted for identification only must be authenticated by witnesses before being accepted as substantive evidence.
Next steps: the hearing will proceed with expert testimony and fact finding; the panel asked an absent member to review the transcript and exhibits before participating in any dispositive fact-finding votes.
