A Nigerian-trained dietitian has been removed from the United Kingdom’s professional register after a disciplinary panel concluded she misrepresented her qualifications to secure a role she was not equipped to handle.
Ifeyinwa Chizube Ndulue-Nonso was sanctioned following a hearing conducted by the Health and Care Professions Council, with proceedings held between March 2 and 10, 2026, under its Conduct and Competence Committee.
The panel found that during her 2023 application for a Band 6 rotational dietitian position at Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, she claimed expertise across multiple specialist areas she did not actually possess. These included fields such as oncology, neurology, gastrointestinal care, respiratory medicine, and advanced nutritional support techniques.
Although she resumed work on February 19, 2024, concerns about her competence surfaced within days. Her line manager, Curtis Roberts, noted inconsistencies between her stated experience and her actual knowledge during an early review meeting.
According to records, she struggled to explain fundamental medical conditions like coeliac disease, irritable bowel syndrome, and eating disorders. She also admitted she had no background in critical care or parenteral nutrition, despite earlier claims suggesting otherwise.
Her clinical supervisor, Lorna Haywood, reported further gaps. During assessments, she was unable to correctly identify basic anatomy, struggled with calculating body mass index, and showed little understanding of key dietetic risks and conditions such as dysphagia and refeeding syndrome.
In one instance, she misidentified a feeding tube inserted through a patient’s nose as a breathing device. She later explained she was unfamiliar with such equipment, contradicting her earlier claims of hands-on experience.
The panel also noted that she searched for medical terms online during tasks and later admitted she had included information in her application that she did not fully understand. Under questioning, she displayed serious knowledge gaps, including incorrectly describing the function of the gallbladder.
The tribunal concluded that her actions were not accidental but deliberate and sustained. It found she knowingly created a false impression of her competence throughout the hiring process and continued to do so even after starting the role.
Addressing the potential risks, the panel warned that allowing a patient who is meant to receive no oral intake to eat could lead to aspiration pneumonia, a potentially life threatening complication. Supervisors expressed concern that her decisions, if left unchecked, could have caused significant harm.
While no patients were harmed because she was restricted from direct clinical duties, the panel ruled that her conduct represented a serious breach of professional trust.
Given the extent of the dishonesty and lack of insight shown, the committee determined that lesser penalties were insufficient. It concluded that removing her from the register was necessary to protect the public and uphold standards within the profession.
An interim suspension lasting 18 months has also been put in place, pending any appeal.
