Menu Close

The Medical Board of California, Department of Consumer Affairs has filed an accusation against Ronald Glousman, M.D., of the Kerlan Jobe Orthopedic Clinic in Los Angeles alleging sexual misconduct while performing an evaluation of a workers’ compensation claimant. The Accusation is a public record and contains the following information.

The alleged victim was identified as “patient R.A., a Spanish-speaking male, who sustained injuries at work when a rack toppled over and struck him on the right shoulder and right side of his head. As a result, patient R.A. filed a worker’s compensation claim.” He then suffered two additional injuries including to his spine while at work.

The patient was then allegedly seen by Philip A. Sobol, M.D., at the Sobol Orthopedic Medical Group, Inc. in 2008 for a worker’s compensation evaluation. Dr. Sobol diagnosed R.A. with right shoulder sprain/strain/contusion/tendinitis, cervical sprain/strain with right upper extremity radiculitis, spondyolosis of the cervical spine at C4-C5, and a lumbar sprain/strain.

Because of the patient’s continued complaints about his right shoulder Dr. Sobol requested a worker’s compensation authorization for a surgical consultation with Ronald Glousman, M.D. (Respondent). Respondent is an orthopedic surgeon specializing in sports medicine, and shoulder, elbow, and knee injuries at Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic.

During the course of Glousman’s treatment of the claimants shoulder, he allegedly conducted an examination of patient’s hip and groin area on several occasions after asking the patient to remove his pants and underwear.

The accusation alleges that because “of what occurred in the last two follow up visits, the patient decided to record this examination. The patient positioned his cell phone’s video camera to capture a majority of the examination room and table.” Allegedly the patient obtained a video recording of sexual misconduct at the time of this visit, according to the allegations of the Accusation. Allegedly Dr. Glousman provided information to the Board about this event and “admitted that by the time he walked back into the examination room Respondent intended to engage in a sexual act with R.A.”

According to the Board, the conduct constitutes “sexual exploitation of a patient” in violation of law, for which the Board seeks to revoke his Physicians and Surgeons Certificate in addition to other relief.

The Accusation is in the preliminary stages of litigation, and Dr. Glousman of course can have evidentiary hearings to disprove any or all of these allegations, and his license status will be determined at the end of any litigation process he may follow.