Doctors Name: Allen C Hassan
License Number: 29816
License Status:  Revoked


City of Record: Sacramento
Region: Sacramento
License issued on: 01/15/2068
Licensing Boards: Medical
Specialties : General/Family Practice

Gender: Male

Accusations and Infractions or Causes for Discipline:  Failed PACE
Failure To Maintain Adequate Records
Unprofessional Conduct
Violation Of Probation
Repeated Negligent Acts
Prescribing To Or Treating Addict
Gross Negligence

Date of Last MBC Action: 11/17/2016

Repeat Offender:  Yes
Ongoing Discipline:  No
Out of State Discipline:  No
No Medical Board Activity:  

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Medical Board Documents, News Articles, Court Documents, Etc.

+Order 1/21/1980
Decision 12/09/1982
+Decision and Order 1/15/2015
+Decision 11/17/2016
Article: Auburn doctor convicted of cop's assault 7/13/2003
Article: Sacramento doctor could lose license over prescription issues 1/04/2014
 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Additional Information (Medical School, Dated Actions, Excerpts from Disciplinary Actions, Notes)

UNIVERSITY OF IOWA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE

Excerpt from Accusation dated 12/27/2013:

FIRST CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient J.M.--Gross Negligence (Pain Management))
[Bus. & Prof. Code,§ 2234,subd. (b)]

23. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234, subdivision (b), in that Respondent was grossly negligent in the care, treatment, and pain management of patient J.M. The circumstances are as follows:

24. In or about June 2010, J.M., a 52 year old female, returned to live in California, and began to have Respondent treat her for neck and back pain that was the result of prior car accidents. Previously, Respondent had treated this patient for a twenty year period before she had moved out of state to Colorado. Respondent ordered an MRI for patient J.M. and reviewed the results. Respondent told patient J.M. that she had problems in the cervical spine that would require surgical intervention.

25. Thereafter, J.M. went to Kaiser Permanente and was told by another physician that she did not have a cervical spine problem but rather carpal tunnel syndrome and that the appropriate treatment was to wear a brace.

26. Patient J.M. returned to Respondent on August 18,2011, in extensive pain in her neck and back. Respondent prescribed this patient the following: Norco, 10/25, up to four times a day; Morphine Sulfate ER 60 mg, one po. b.i.d; Methadone 10 mg half tablets two times a day for five days and then full tablets for five days; and Lunesta, 3 mg at bedtime to sleep. Patient J.M. expressed to Respondent her fear that taking all these medications could have side effects and cause addiction. Respondent said that if she followed his instructions she would not have any of these issues.

27. Patient J.M. described Respondent on August 18, 2011, as appearing "loosey-goosey." She saw Respondent fall into a wall when walking down a hallway. J.M. stated that Respondent was "high as a kite" and was probably under the influence of some drug.

28. After patient J.M. took all of the prescribed medication, (except the Lunestra), the next day, she experienced a big drop in her heart rate and nausea. As a result J.M. had her husband take her to the Kaiser emergency room to be treated.

29. Respondent was interviewed by a Medical Board investigator on April 9, 2013. With respect to patient J.M., Respondent admitted that he did not take good notes and had a "terrible work-up" of this patient. Respondent admitted that he did not have a diagnosis for the patient and a physical examination was not documented. Respondent speculated that there might have been a dictated report for this patient but it would not be in the chart because someone stole his computer.

30. Respondent's lack of a history and physical, no follow-up treatment, no planned periodic review of this patient, no signed informed consent along with the excessive prescribing of pain medication which might have compromised the patient's health collectively constitutes an extreme departure from the standard of care in violation of section 2234, subdivision (b), of the Code.

SECOND CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient J.M.--Failure To Maintain Records)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2266]

31. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 24-30 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

32. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2266 in that he failed to record a history and physical, had no signed informed consent, no record of planned follow-up treatment, and no record of planned periodic review of patient J.M.

THIRD CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient R.S.--Gross Negligence (Pain Management))
[Bus. & Prof. Code,§ 2234,subd. (b)]

33. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234, subdivision (b), in that Respondent was grossly negligent in the care, treatment, and pain management of patient R.S. The circumstances are as follows:

34. On or about September 21, 2011, Respondent undertook the care and treatment of patient R.S., a 26 year old male who had a history of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), mental breakdowns and drug overdoses. During Respondent's period of treating R.S. from September 21 through December 21, 2011, Respondent wrote multiple prescriptions for clonazepam, fioricet, morphine, methadone, dilaudid, oxycodone, trazodone and soma, all for patient R.S.

35. On October 9, 2011, R.S. was admitted to the Veteran Administration (VA) Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU), as an Iraqi war veteran with opiate dependence and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). R.S. had recently overdosed on heroin while in a substance abuse program and that was documented in his medical records. Prior to R.S.'s admission at the VA, Respondent prescribed clonazepam to this patient on October 3 and 5, 2011. In addition, Respondent prescribed temazepam, clonazepam and hydromorphone 8mg., 100 tablets to R.S. on October 8, 2011. Respondent visited patient R.S. at the VA PICU and was seen hugging and crying with the patient. Respondent claimed not to be the patient's doctor until he was confronted with the prescriptions that he wrote for R.S.

36. Previously R.S. had been treated at the VA Medical Hospital for opioid withdrawal on September 13, 2011, opioid abuse on September 14, 2011, traumatic brain injury on September 21, 2011, and opioid dependence on October 7, 2011. From the October 9, 2011, admission to the VA PICU, R.S. was discharged on October 12, 2011, from a 72 hour hold, but only after Respondent vouched for R.S.'s health, welfare and safety before a Board of Professionals. R.S. was released to Respondent's custody and he lived at the back of Respondent's medical offices for a couple of months along with living in Respondent's house located next to the medical offices. The day after discharge on October 13, 2011, Respondent prescribed another 100 hydromorphone tablets to R.S.

37. On October 19,2011, Respondent prescribed to R.S. methadone 10 mg, 150 tablets, clonazepam 2 mg, tablets #90, morphine 60 mg., #60 and hydromorphone 4 mg, 150 tablets. This pattern of frequent and significant amounts of both opioids and other controlled substances prescribed by Respondent to R.S. continued through November 7, 2011.

38. Respondent was interviewed by a Medical Board investigator on April 9, 2013. With respect to patient R.S., Respondent admitted that he was treating R.S. for lower back pain, monitoring his PTSD and was aware the patient was on heroin. Respondent claimed he had such poor records on this patient because his computer had been stolen.

39. Respondent's lack of a history and physical, and his failure to obtain an MRI, to provide follow-up treatment, to periodically review this patient, to obtain signed informed consent, along with the excessive prescribing of pain medication, collectively constitute an extreme departure from the standard of care in violation of section 2234, subdivision (b), of the Code.

FOURTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient R.S.--Gross Negligence-Prescribing to an Addict)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 2234, subd. (b) and 2241]

40. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 34-39 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

41. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code sections 2234, subdivision (b), and 2241, in that he was grossly negligent in prescribing opioids to a known addict. The circumstances are as follows:

42. Respondent admitted that he knew R.S. was a known heroin addict and that he had recently been discharged from the V A Medical Hospital for narcotic overdose yet he continued to prescribe a large amount of opioids and other controlled substances. Such conduct constitutes prescribing to an addict in violation of Business & Professions Code sections 2234, subdivision (b), and 2241.

FIFTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient R.S.—Repeated Negligence-Lack of Treatment of PTSD and Failure to maintain records)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2234,subd. (c)]

43. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 34-39 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

44. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234, subdivision (c), in that he engaged in repeated negligent acts in his care and treatment of patient R.S. The circumstances are as follows:

45. There is no record of Respondent treating patient R.S.'s PTSD or other comorbid psychiatric issues, nor did Respondent consult with or refer the patient out to a specialist in either psychiatry or addiction medicine, and such failures constitute a single act of negligence. In addition Respondent's failure to maintain an adequate medical record of patient R.S. also constitutes a single negligent act. These failures collectively constitute repeated negligent acts in violation of2234, subdivision (c), ofthe Code.

46. The allegations of the First and Second Causes for Discipline are incorporated herein as if fully set forth.

47. Respondent's care and treatment of J.M. as set forth above includes the following acts and/or omissions which constitute negligent acts namely, Respondent's failure to maintain adequate medical records on patient J.M., including a lack of a history and physical examination; his lack of follow-up treatment; his failure to provide periodic review; and his failure to obtain a signed informed consent, which taken in combination with the negligent acts in paragraph 43, constitute repeated negligent acts in violation of section 2234, subdivision (c) of the Code.

SIXTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient R.S.--Gross Negligence (Unethical Behavior))
[Bus. & Prof. Code,§§ 2234,subd. (b) & 2234]

48. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 34-38 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

49. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code sections 2234, subdivision (b) and/or 2234, in that he was grossly negligent and/or engaged in unprofessional conduct when he permitted R. S., a psychiatric and narcotic addicted patient, to live in his office and residence. This violates the physician-patient relationship, and represents an unethical conflict of interest which constitutes unprofessional conduct and/or an extreme departure from the standard of care.

SEVENTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient R.S.-Failure To Maintain Records)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2266]

50. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 34-38 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

51. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under section 2266 of the Code in that he failed to record a history and physical, obtain an MRI, do any follow-up treatment, or periodic review of patient R.S.

EIGHTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient J.W.--Gross Negligence (Pain Management))
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2234,subd . (b)]

52. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234, subdivision (b), in that he was grossly negligent in the care and treatment of patient J.W. The circumstances are as follows:

53. In or about May 2011 through April 2012, Respondent undertook the care and treatment of patient J.W., a 28-year-old male who attempted suicide in October 2011, suffered lower back pain due to both scoliosis and herniated discs, and who also suffered from PTSD and traumatic brain injuries due to lED (Improved Explosive Devices) explosions. Respondent allowed J.W. to live for several months in the back of Respondent's medical offices.

54. Respondent's clinical notes indicate patient J. W. was on methadone for pain with prescriptions written May 25, 2011, for methadone 10mg #180, on May 27, 2011, for methadone 10 mg #36, on June 1, 2011, for methadone 10 mg 180, after a note that patient claims his refills were stolen. A July 1, 2011 lab report lists patient J.W.'s urine as positive for fentanyl, methadone and benzodiazepine. No adequate pain history was taken, no complete history and no adequate physical examination was noted for the entire period of treatment by Respondent of J.W. From August 13, 2011, through February 4, 2012, Respondent wrote multiple prescriptions for Clonazepam, hydrocodone/APAP, hyromorphone HCL, hydromorphone hydrochloride, methadone hydrochloride, morphine sulfate, and oxycodone hydrochloride. On February 23, 2012, there are two prescriptions written by Respondent for oxycontin 30 mg #120 and one of the prescriptions included dilaudid and klonopin for J.W. On April 3, 2012, Respondent wrote for methadone and dilaudid for J.W.

55. Respondent's lack of a history and physical, follow-up treatment, periodic review of this patient, and signed informed consent, along with the excessive prescribing of pain medication including prescribing both short acting and long acting pain medications in combination and prescribing a narcotic refill after patient reported theft of his narcotics, collectively constitute an extreme departure from the standard of care in violation of section 2234, subdivision (b), of the Code.

NINTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient J.W.--Repeated Negligence-Lack of Psychiatric Treatment & Poor Records)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2234,subd. (c)]

56. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 52-55 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

57. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234, subdivision (c), in that in that he engaged in repeated negligent acts in his care and treatment of patient J.W. The circumstances are as follows:

58. There is no record of Respondent treating patient J. W.'s PTSD and anxiety disorder, nor did Respondent consult with or refer the patient out to a specialist in either psychiatry or addiction medicine, and such failures constitute a single act of negligence. In addition, Respondent's failure to maintain an adequate medical record of patient J.W. also constitutes a single negligent act. These failures collectively constitute repeated negligent acts in violation of 2234, subdivision (c), of the Code.

TENTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient J.W.—Gross Negligence (Unethical Behavior))
[Bus. & Prof. Code,§§ 2234,subd. (b) &/or 2234]

59. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 53-55 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

60. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code sections 2234, subdivision (b), and/or 2234, in that he was grossly negligent and/or engaged in unprofessional conduct when he permitted J.W., a psychiatric and narcotic addicted patient, to live in his office and/or residence. This violates the physician-patient relationship, and represents an unethical conflict of interest.

ELEVENTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient J.W.--Failure To Maintain Records)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2266]

61. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 53-55 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

62. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under section 2266 in that he failed to record a history and physical, to record any follow-up treatment, and to record periodic review of patient J.W.

TWELFTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient C.W.--Gross Negligence (Pain Management))
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2234, subd. (b)]

63. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234, subdivision (b) in that in that he was grossly negligent in the care and treatment of patient C.W. The circumstances are as follows:

64. In or about July 2011, Respondent undertook the care and treatment of patient C.W., a 34-year-old woman, to treat her pain relating to degenerative discs in her back. On August 1, 2011, Respondent diagnosed C.W. with degenerative disc disorder without conducting a physical examination. There was no psychiatric work-up or consult regarding the patient's report of chronic stress and depression. A urine test was done on C. W. on the same day, which was positive for hydromorphone, oxycodone, oxymorphone, and clonazepam. Respondent prescribed Dilaudid 4 mg # 120 and restoril 15 mg #3 0.

65. On August 24,2011, Respondent prescribed to C.W., Percocet 10/325 #120, Klonopin 1mg #120, Soma 350 mg #120, and Restoril 30 mg #140. There was no physical examination and no psychiatric work-up of the patient. On September 17, 2011, Respondent prescribed to C.W., Percocet 10/325 #120, Elavil #30, and Restoril30 mg #140. There was no physical examination and no psychiatric work-up of the patient. On September 22, 2011, Respondent prescribed to C.W., klonopin 1mg #120, and Soma 350 mg #120. The patient's chief complaint was that she was in a lot of pain. There was no physical examination and no psychiatric work-up of the patient.

66. In patient C.W.'s medical record with Respondent was a report by Dr. S., dated March 5, 2010, which referenced the patient's three prior back surgeries, a depressive disorder, and chronic pain due to trauma. Dr. S. did a complete history and physical and concluded that patient C. W. was not a candidate for long term opiate therapy but that perhaps short acting opioids given briefly would be o.k. Dr. S. felt that the best way to treat C.W.'s pain was to consider the use of spinal cord stimulation.

67. Respondent's lack of a history and physical, no follow-up treatment, periodic review of this patient and signed informed consent along with the excessive prescribing of pain medication constitutes an extreme departure from the standard of care in violation of section 2234, subdivision (b), of the Code.

THIRTEENTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient C.W.--Repeated Negligence-Lack of Treatment of Psychiatric Issues & Poor Records)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2234,subd. (c)]

68. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 64-67 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

69. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under Code section 2234, subdivision (c), in that he engaged in repeated negligent acts in his care and treatment of patient C.W. The circumstances are as follows:

70. There is no record ofRespondent treating patient C.W.'s PTSD or depression, despite Respondent's claim that C.W. was a drug addict, Respondent failed to consult with or refer the patient out to a specialist in either psychiatry or addiction medicine; and such failures constitute a single act of negligence. In addition, Respondent's failure to maintain an adequate medical record of patient C.W. also constitutes a single negligent act. These failures collectively constitute repeated negligent acts in violation of 2234, subdivision (c), of the Code.

FOURTEENTH CAUSE
FOR DISCIPLINE
(Patient C.W .—Failure To Maintain Records)
[Bus. & Prof. Code, § 2266]

71. Complainant re-alleges paragraphs 64-67 above and incorporates them by reference herein as though fully set forth.

72. Respondent is subject to disciplinary action under section 2266 in that he failed to record a history and physical, to record any follow-up treatment, to record periodic review of patient C.W.

 

#NOTE: Replace first decision, already downloaded.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

DISCLAIMER: Most of the information found on this website is hand-culled directly from the Medical Board of California's ("Board") website and from news articles and is only as good as that original information; it's just easier to find and read here. We have a VERY small team of advocates working on this project, and cannot keep everything up to date in real time. Always check the Medical Board website directly for more information or changes.

Infractions are pulled from the "Board's" disciplinary documents themselves and/or news articles. Sometimes the categories and the categories here don't match the Board's exactly, so make sure you look up the infractions in the actual Medical Board documents.

Note: Accusations mean that a doctor has not had a hearing or been found guilty of any charges, but are being investigated by the Medical Board and/or the California Attorney General's Office.

**The California Medical Association (CMA) is a union of sorts for doctors in California. They have a lot of political power and donate a lot of money to the state's legislators in return for their "support." They appear to have a lot of "sway" over the Medical Board's members. One would think that most doctors would be members of the CMA with the amount of power they wield, but in actuality, 2/3 of this state's doctors refuse to join the CMA...which means that the majority of doctors in the state, choose to NOT be members.

This website is for informational and educational purposes only and is here only to help consumers research their doctors and make their own decisions, and does not necessarily reflect the feelings or research of the owners or moderators of this website. Please contact the webmaster with any questions, or to report errors or ommissions at webmaster@4patientsafety.org