MORE than two doctors a week in Scotland were investigated over allegations of "serious" professional misconduct last year.
In 2012, the General Medical Council, the disciplinary body for doctors throughout the UK, probed 126 allegations relating to medics working in Scottish health boards where the claims were serious enough to threaten their fitness to practise.
These are known as "stream one" investigations.
It compares to 120 such investigations into Scotland-based doctors in 2011 and is almost double the figure from 2007, when the GMC probed 69 cases.
The statistics were released by the Scottish Government after a parliamentary question from Scottish Conservative Highlands and Islands MSP Mary Scanlon.
The figures also revealed there were an additional 82 "stream two" probes, where an allegation is less serious but could be indicative of a more worrying pattern.
In total, there have been 590 stream one probes since 2007 - where claims are considered "serious" and "call into question the doctor's fitness to practice", and 562 stream two investigations.
However, despite the high level of probes, only a handful of doctors have been disciplined in the last six years. Since 2007, only 54 fitness to practise hearings have taken place, with hardly any doctors struck off or suspended.
Ms Scanlon said: "For such a high number to take place, and for that trend to be increasing, is extremely concerning.
"Patients and relatives need to know that doctors are performing to the very highest of standards, and that when that isn't happening action is being taken. It is strange a relatively large number of investigations should yield so few disciplinary outcomes."
The Herald reported earlier this year how spinal surgeon Colin Mainds, who left a string of patients disabled and in pain after botched operations at the Ross Hall private hospital in Glasgow, was allowed to continue working.
A tribunal concluded that, although his fitness to practise was impaired, his errors weren't serious enough to be struck off.
Niall Dickson, chief executive of the General Medical Council, said: "We are not here to protect doctors. Our job is to protect patients. We take every complaint seriously and take immediate action when we believe patients may be at risk.
"More complaints does not necessarily mean healthcare is getting worse. It may mean problems are being identified and reported.
"We've seen a shift in culture in recent years, with patients, doctors and other healthcare professionals being more willing to voice concerns and health managers more likely to be looking out for problems and taking action. But not every complaint made to us is upheld or results in action being taken against a doctor."
Mr Dickson explained the procedure for dealing with the most serious allegations.
He said: "The most serious concerns are heard by panels, overseen by a judge, who decide on the evidence presented in each case. These panels, run by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service, come to their conclusions autonomously."
A Scottish Government spokesman said the regulation of doctors was reserved to the UK Government. He added: "The GMC is responsible for independently investigating complaints it receives about doctors practising in the UK and hearings are conducted by the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service.
"The Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care examines every decision of the Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service and has powers to refer decisions it believes to be unduly lenient to the appropriate courts."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article