A SURGEON has been accused of carrying out sexually motivated exams on a patient during her post-operative care.

Pagolu Prasad, a Southend consultant orthopaedic surgeon, is facing a Medical Practitioners Tribunal in Manchester this week amid allegations he has behaved inappropriately.

Mr Prasad, who is a former expert on spinal injuries at Southend Hospital, is accused of carrying out sexually-motivated exams on the woman in June 2013.

It is also alleged that Mr Prasad, over a period of treatment in June 2013, failed to document a vaginal examination in the woman’s medical records.

The claims also indicate he failed to carry out a rectal examination when consent was given by the woman and when it was clinically indicated to do so.

It is also alleged he failed to obtain informed consent regarding another intimate examination.

The tribunal is set to take place before a professional panel and will last up to 11 days at a venue in Oxford Street, Manchester.

The 53-year-old has a history of disciplinary measures.

In 2015, he was given a warning after a string of allegations were found proved by a Medical Practitioners Tribunal.

The allegations included making inappropriate comments about a female colleague’s appearance and her shoes in June 2013.

He also admitting altering medical records after botching a procedure on a patient and encouraged a nurse to write an account that coincided with his.

He also received a six-month suspension order for sexually harassing a colleague.

A tribunal held in 2017 heard that he acted inappropriately towards a female junior colleague at the hospital.

The tribunal found that, in June 2014, he told the woman about sexual activities he performed with his girlfriend and held her hand on several occasions.

He also asked the woman if she was getting enough sexual activity – or words to that effect.

The panel found that allegations he had stroked her arm or asked if she had a boyfriend were not proved.

Mr Prasad had denied the claim and said it was made because of his professional criticism of the victim.

Ahead of this latest hearing he has been told he must not perform intimate examinations on patients unless it is a life-threatening emergency.