Foot doctor who ‘preyed upon patient vulnerability’ has his licence revoked
An Ottawa foot doctor who treated his patients with imitation implants has been barred for life from practising podiatry in Ontario and ordered to pay a hefty fine.
The ruling was the second banishment Pierre Dupont has faced from a health profession regulatory agency.
A 2016 CBC News investigation revealed he had his Quebec dentistry licence revoked a decade earlier.
According to the discipline committee of the Ontario College of Chiropodists, where Dupont faced an in-person hearing last week, attended by some of his former patients, Dupont “preyed upon patient vulnerability … and displayed an overall betrayal of the patient’s trust … .”
According to the facts presented before the committee, Dupont performed a complicated implant procedure on a number of patients between 2014 and 2016 at his clinic, Ottawa Foot Practice.
Before performing stent implant surgery — intended to “re-align the foot and ankle bones” to reduce pain and restore normal function — Dupont told his clients they were receiving a Health Canadaapproved implant known as the HyProCure Stent.
Dupont instead implanted a stent of his own design, which was not government-approved, and in several cases caused further pain and complications in his clients.
In his bio at the Ottawa Foot Practice clinic, which has since been removed from the website, Dupont boasted of his stature as a “Master HyProCure Surgeon” and claimed he had the procedure performed on his own sore feet in 2013.
“I had the pleasure of meeting, diagnosing and helping thousands of patients in the National Capital Region before making the decision to expand local treatment options by opening my own practice,” his now-deleted biography read.
He also claimed to be the inventor of “a surgical instrument to facilitate HyProCure and talocalcaneal implant insertion and resizing procedure.”
The college disciplinary committee heard from numerous patients of Dupont’s, and listed dozens of instances of professional misconduct related to their care.
In one, identified as N.B., Dupont failed to place the stent in the appropriate position. In another patient, identified as M.K., Dupont failed to “adequately address complications throughout the procedure, including the excessive haemorrhage (bleeding) that had occurred … .”
In another patient, C.G., Dupont “made use of his own surgical instruments” and then failed to communicate with another health professional when that patient experienced post-operative complications.
In most of the case studies cited, Dupont “failed to adequately conduct post-operative care.”
Dupont admitted to the misconduct as presented by the college, which the committee considered a mitigating factor in his penalty.
“He has shown regret and remorse for his conduct,” the committee concluded.
However, several aggravating factors contributed to the college’s penalty, which includes a $30,000 fine and a lifelong ban from practising in Ontario.
The committee found Dupont’s misconduct was not an isolated incident, and rather “consisted of multiple incidents on multiple patients over an extended period of time.”
His conduct “demonstrated minimal interest in existing health care standards and legislation designed, and in place, to protect patients from potential harm.”
The panel was “unconvinced” in Dupont’s potential for rehabilitation and said the revoking his licence permanently was “essential in protecting the public.”
Dupont waived his right to an appeal.
He has shown regret and remorse for his conduct.