Find out how the NMC panel acted in this case. Not yet read the case? Read the charge and background here
The panel considered factors such as insight and remorse, whether the conduct is capable of remedy, whether it has been remedied and the likelihood of repetition.
The panel concluded that there were failures in Nurse A’s practice that did put residents and others at risk. However, having carefully considered Nurse A’s evidence and the supporting documents and testimonials, it was satisfied that any such risk has been recognised and remediate. The panel therefore concluded that there was no current risk and no future risk of repetition.
In terms of insight, the panel was of the view that Nurse A demonstrated a high level of insight within her reflective piece. She categorised each charge separately and submitted the potential implications and harm that could have occurred to residents, their families, colleagues and the profession.
The panel noted that Nurse A is now the ward lead nurse for medicines management and medical devices and had undertaken additional training for these roles and this has improved her practice.
The panel had regard to the fact that she fully engaged with these proceedings and you made early admissions. The panel was satisfied that Nurse A fully remediated and acknowledged her shortcomings. It had sight of the additional training documents and the range of positive up-to-date testimonials and references, ranging from ward sisters to ward receptionists.
The panel concluded that there were no public protection concerns in Nurse A’s case, and there is a very low risk of repetition. The panel determined that it is in the public interest to keep a nurse such Nurse A in unrestricted practice serving the public.