A nurse sacked over claims he falsified vital patient observations is pursuing an unfair dismissal case at an employment tribunal.

Darren Diplexcito was dismissed in December last year after bosses at NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde upheld allegations that he fraudulently entered blood sugar results in patient records without performing the tests.

Mr Diplexcito denies falsifying the record and claims his dismissal was “unduly harsh”. He is seeking reinstatement with the health board amid claims that a flawed disciplinary process saw him called “paranoid” by a panel member.

The tribunal heard that the nurse made handwritten notes in patient records on July 1 and May 7 and 8, 2018, recording blood sugar levels on National Early Warning Score (NEWS) charts - important indicators of patient wellbeing.

An electronic tool is used to measure blood sugar and the results are automatically uploaded to an electronic log.

However, Solicitor David James, representing NHSGGC, asked Mr Diplexcito if the notes he had made appeared anywhere on the log.

The nurse replied: “No, they do not.”

The tribunal heard that a colleague of Mr Diplexcito went on to claim that a patient told her he hadn’t been woken up to have his blood sugar taken.

Mr James added: “We have multiple NEWS charts on which you have manually recorded blood sugar readings, we have an electronic record which does not record those blood sugar readings having ever been carried out, we have confirmation from a clinical scientist that the electronic record is accurate and we have no explanation from you for the discrepancy between the electronic record and what you have written down.

“Given all of that, would you accept that a reasonable conclusion would be that you didn’t carry out those blood sugar recordings?”

Mr Diplexcito, who is representing himself, replied: “I can see that that explanation could present itself as being reasonable, however I would contest that.

“All the way through I have maintained that if I was to document a recording, I would have obtained that recording. I can’t provide any other explanation other than my recollection and account of events."

During the hearing, it emerged that an HR panel member referred to Mr Diplexcito as “paranoid”.

Employment judge Muriel Robison asked the nurse what significance he felt this had on the outcome of his disciplinary and the overall fairness of the procedure.

He said: “I think that when you are dealing with an employee and it’s widely known that this is someone dealing with a mental health problem, to then be trying to put your side of events across and have an HR panel member call you paranoid, that has a massive effect on how you feel.

“You wouldn’t expect someone at that level to call you paranoid at the best of times, never mind if you’ve got a mental health problem.”

Mr Diplexcito revealed that the remark has been the subject of a grievance with his former employer.

“The HR panel member has apologised and has heavily reflected and has demonstrated insight into how she’s changing her practice and I’m satisfied with the response I’ve received from the grievance with regards to that,” he said.

The tribunal, taking place virtually, continues.