Find out how the NMC panel acted in this case. Not yet read the case? Read the charge and background here
The panel first considered what it deemed to be the aggravating and mitigating factors in this case and determined the following:
Aggravating factors:
- Nurse A’s failings were in relation to basic nursing care;
- Nurse A was accompanied by a student nurse and should have been acting as a role model;
- They delegated their responsibility to a member of the public;
- There was a potential risk of harm to Patient A;
- They demonstrated limited insight and remediation.
Mitigating factors:
- This was a single incident;
- Nurse A made admissions at an early stage at trust level;
- There was no evidence of harmful deep-seated or attitudinal issues;
- They had been working unrestricted without complaint since the incident.
The panel first considered whether to take no action but concluded that this would be inappropriate.
The panel next considered that it would be inappropriate to impose a caution order.
The panel next determined that it would be possible to formulate appropriate and practical conditions, which would address the failings highlighted in this case.
The panel determined that Nurse A’s actions were capable of remediation with development of their insight.
The panel determined that the appropriate and proportionate sanction was that of a conditions of practice order.
The panel considered very carefully whether to impose a suspension order in this case but determined that it would be disproportionate.
Having regard to the matters it identified, the panel concluded that a conditions of practice order would mark the importance of maintaining public confidence in the profession, and would send to the public and the profession a clear message about the standards of practice required of a registered nurse.
The period of this order was for nine months.