Health and Care Professions Council determination — review hearing
HCPTS extends Pratiksha Venkatesh Patil's suspension by 12 months
The HCPTS review panel found continuing impairment after receiving no evidence that earlier competence concerns had been addressed. The further suspension begins on 23 July 2026.
MedicWatch editorial · Published 11 June 2026 · Updated 22 September 2026
Suspension (suspended from practice) — 1 year
Data last checked: 22 September 2026Report a correction
What does “suspended from practice” mean?
The regulator imposed a fixed-term suspension in this decision. Its start date, appeal provisions and any later review affect whether it is currently in force. Check the official register for the practitioner's current status.
Concerning Pratiksha Venkatesh Patil, physiotherapist (Health and Care Professions Council PH128318).
Decision date: 11 June 2026 · Hearing started 11 June 2026
In plain English
The HCPTS panel extended Pratiksha Venkatesh Patil's suspension for 12 months from 23 July 2026. Reviewing earlier findings of lack of competence in physiotherapy assessment, patient safety and record keeping, it found no evidence of insight or remediation and a continuing risk of repetition. The panel found her fitness to practise remained impaired and considered conditions of practice unworkable.
Charges
The review concerned earlier findings of lack of competence across physiotherapy assessment, clinical reasoning, patient safety and record keeping. The 2025 panel proved particulars 1–5, 8(a), 8(c), 9–12, 13(a), 13(b) in part, 14 and 15; other allegations were not included in those findings.
Findings
The review panel found continuing impairment on personal and public grounds. There was no evidence of insight, remediation or maintenance of professional skills, and no engagement since November 2023. It found a continuing risk of repetition and considered conditions unworkable. It extended suspension for 12 months from 23 July 2026. Striking off was not available at this review because the required two-year period under substantive suspension or conditions in a lack-of-competence case had not elapsed.
Source
All facts on this page are drawn from the publicly published Health and Care Professions Council determination linked below. MedicWatch does not editorialise the regulator’s findings.
Spot something incorrect?
If a fact on this page is wrong, or you believe the page should not be published, please submit a correction or takedown request.