Case No. 08-10, David Korn DO, MD(H)

Excerpted from: Arizona Homeopathic Board Meeting Minutes, July 8, 2008

4. Complaints and Investigations
   3. Review, Consideration, and Action – Initial Review(s)
      Case No. 08-10 David Korn DO, MD(H)

      Ms. Springer informed the Board that the medical investigator’s report had been completed but not received in time for this meeting. In addition, she explained that the Board had to determine whether or not to seek primary jurisdiction since Dr. Korn was also licensed by the Osteopathic Board of Examiners.

      Dr. Grout made a motion to request primary jurisdiction since the type of care provided to patients involved homeopathic procedures. Dr. Rupley seconded the motion. During discussion Dr. Grout inquired if it was proper, as was the case in the instant matter, for the Board to accept anonymous complaints.

      Mr. Farris made a motion to adjourn to executive session at 10:30 a.m. for legal advice. Dr. Grout seconded the motion that passed with a majority vote. Dr. Adler dissented. The Board returned to the regular session at 10:55 a.m.

      Returning to the original motion to claim primary jurisdiction to conduct the investigation, the Board voted unanimously to assert primary jurisdiction and directed Ms. Springer to notify the Osteopathic Board of Examiners.

      The matter was continued to the next regular meeting.

Excerpted from: Arizona Homeopathic Board Meeting Minutes, September 9, 2008

5. Complaints and Investigations
   2. Review, Consideration and Action – Ongoing Investigations
      Case No. 08-10 David Korn DO, MD(H)

      Ms. Springer gave a status report concerning the status of the Board’s request for primary jurisdiction noting that no decision had been made at the Osteopathic Board. The Board requested that upon notification of the jurisdictional determination, Dr. Korn be informed of the Board’s intention to hold an investigational interview pursuant to A.R.S. 32-2934 (C), at the next regular meeting.

Excerpted from: Arizona Homeopathic Board Meeting Minutes, November 18, 2008

3. Review, Consideration and Action on Applications
   2. Medical Assistants
      Sheena Korn

      The Board considered the application of Sheena Korn following a short break. Mr. Farris commented that the application should be tabled until an informal hearing is held in Case No. 08-10. Following a brief discussion about the number of training hours completed at the Columbus Paraprofessional Institute (CPI) medical assistant program in Columbus, Ohio, Mr. Farris stated that he would like additional information about the type of training courses completed by Mrs. Korn while attending CPI. Dr. Grout stated that the transcript is not clear on the number of training hours completed, nor is there a course listing of the types of courses completed.

      Mr. Farris asked what training standards were required for medical assistant training in the homeopathic medical assistant rules. Mrs. Springer stated that the rules require 240 classroom hours in medical secretarial skills and 240 classroom hours in back office assisting as well as 320 hours of supervised clinical experience. Dr. Grout stated that the supervision from Dr. Korn would comprise a practical education program and that additional information should be obtained to verify the types of duties and the number of hours she provides to patients that come to the clinic.

      Mr. Farris requested that the application be tabled and additional information about Mrs. Korn’s training be obtained. The other Board members concurred.

4. Review, Consideration and Action on Complaints and Investigations
   2. Review, Consideration, and Action – Ongoing Investigations
      Case No. 08-10 David Korn DO, MD(H)

      Dr. David Korn was present with his wife Sheena, and attorney, Mr. Stephen Myers to respond to questions.

      Mrs. Springer read a statement of the initial allegations in the anonymous complaint. The Board’s medical consultant, Dr. Charles Schwengel was available to present a report of his visit to Dr. Korn’s clinic and investigation into the allegations. Dr. Schwengel began his presentation stating that no evidence was found to support the allegation of a violation of universal precautions standards. He had found the facility to be clean and in-service training information timely and appropriately documented as required by OSHA. Dr. Schwengel responded to a question from Dr. Rowe regarding an allegation that personal laundry had been done at the clinic. He confirmed that Dr. Korn had admitted this allegation, but that he was unaware that this action was a violation of OSHA standards. There was additional discussion regarding the status of Mrs. Korn and her work role at the clinic. Dr. Schwengel stated she was not registered with the homeopathic board as a medical assistant. He noted Dr. Korn had provided documentation of her training in phlebotomy and medical assistant coursework at a college in Columbus, Ohio, as well as current coursework in a nursing program. Noting that one of the allegations related to Mrs. Korn providing IV therapy to patients, both Dr. Adler and Dr. Rowe inquired whether current medical assistant rules address this issue. The Board thanked Dr Schwengel for his presentation.

      Mr. Farris made a motion to adjourn to Executive Session for legal advice at 11:30 p.m. Dr. Rupley seconded the motion that passed unanimously. The Board returned to the regular session at 12:00 p.m.

      The Board invited Dr. Korn to address the Board. He stated that Mrs. Korn was well trained, that she had completed prerequisites for a nursing degree, and had completed training related to oxidative therapy, the provision of IVs and phlebotomy. In response to a question from Dr. Rowe, he confirmed that he provides supervision to staff as needed.

      Mr. Myers requested to speak to the Board and stated that the Board’s request for a response to the anonymous complaint had not included a specific allegation. Following that statement, Board members continued their inquiry. Dr. Rowe inquired why Mrs. Korn was not registered as a homeopathic medical assistant. In his response, Dr. Korn stated he felt it was not necessary in that she had standard medical assistant training as well as specialized training in oxidative therapy and IVs.

      Dr. Rowe made a motion dismissing allegations 2, 4, 5, and 6 noting that there was insufficient evidence to support a violation. He made a recommendation that the Board hold an informal interview regarding allegations 1 and 3 at the next regular meeting. Mrs. Stika seconded the motion that passed unanimously.

      Vote: 6-0 Informal interview
      Dr. Rowe, Ms. Stika, Dr. Grout, Dr. Rupley, Dr. Adler, Mr. Farris

Excerpted from: Arizona Homeopathic Board Meeting Minutes, January 13, 2009

4. Review, Consideration and Action on Complaints and Investigations
   2. Informal Interview pursuant to ARS 32-2934(G)
      Case No. 08-10 David Korn DO, MD(H)

      Dr. Korn was present at 2:30 p.m. for an informal interview pursuant to A.R.S. §32-2934(G). Also present were Stephen Myers, Dr. Korn’s attorney, and Dr. Charles Schwengel, DO, MD(H), the Board’s medical consultant. A court reporter was present to transcribe the proceedings.

      Mrs. Springer read a statement summarizing the complaint that was originally referred by the Arizona Industrial Commission, Division of Occupational Safety and Health from an anonymous complainant. In November, the Board had considered six allegations made in the complaint. At that time, the Board voted to dismiss four of the allegations as unsubstantiated. The informal interview was scheduled to address two remaining issues that alleged medical assistants were performing procedures only a registered nurse may perform.

      Board members Grout and Adler referred to the current medical assistant rules and noted that there were no specific rules addressing the question of whether a medical assistant may draw blood and perform IV therapies. Dr. Korn stated that his wife, the medical assistant noted in the original complaint, had completed standard medical assistant training in Ohio, had multiple course work related to the provision of chelation and IV therapies, and was completing nursing studies at a nearby community college. He confirmed that Mrs. Korn was not currently registered as a medical assistant but had a pending application before the Board. In addition, Dr. Korn noted he had employed another medical assistant in his clinic and was in compliance with supervision aspects regarding medical assistants.

      Mr. Farris questioned Dr. Korn about Mrs. Korn’s usage of the term “nurse” on an in-service training record. At this point, Mr. Myers requested permission to address the Board and stated that Mr. Farris’ concern had not been listed as one of the allegations in the informal interview notice.

      Dr. Korn concluded his statement to the Board.

      Assistant Attorney General Hargraves directed Board member’s attention to the definition of ‘medical assistant’ as defined in A.R.S. §32-2901(15) and a review of the current medical assistant rules in AAC R4-38-301-311.

      Dr. Adler stated that current medical assistant rules do not clearly specify who should be registered to provide these types of therapies. It was his opinion that the medical assistant had been adequately supervised and trained and was qualified to provide the therapy.

      Both Drs. Rowe and Grout agreed that the current rules create a gray area and that could lead to various interpretations of the need for registration. Dr. Rowe went on to state that the new proposed rules specify that any medical assistant providing a technical homeopathic function will be subject to registration. He expressed concern that Dr. Korn appeared to have been aware that Mrs. Korn did not correctly designate her title on an in-service training record.

      Dr. Rupley indicated he would be comfortable with a letter of concern relating to the titling of office personnel, specifically the use of the term ‘nurse’ by Mrs. Korn on the in-service training record.

      Mr. Myers asked to address the Board regarding this issue and stated that he and his client were unaware of the Board’s concern with the use of the term ‘nurse’ and were unprepared to discuss the issue and had not been provided notice of the Board’s concern in the ’Notice of Informal Interview’. He directed their attention to the listed allegations in the Notice.

      Mr. Farris and Dr. Adler stated they were comfortable with the discussion of the allegations as indicated on the notice of informal interview. Dr. Adler moved to dismiss the case. Mr. Farris seconded the motion that passed with a majority vote. Dr. Rowe voted ‘No’ stating his continued concern with the usage of the term ‘Nurse’ on the in-service record.

      Roll Call: Dismiss 5 aye, 1 nay
      Aye: Rupley, Farris, Grout, Stika, Adler
      Nay: Rowe.

Excerpted from: Arizona Homeopathic Board Meeting Minutes, March 10, 2009

3. Review, Consideration and Action on Complaints and Investigations
   2. Medical Assistants:
      Shenandoah Kern

      At the Board’s request Ms. Springer provided information about Ms. Korn’s medical assistant training and nursing training. Dr. Grout made a motion to approve the application. Dr. Adler seconded the motion that passed unanimously.