Fatal Dispensing errors

[silnarnin]

Ever thought why only community pharmacists appear in the PJ news about the Stat Com? Is it only community pharmacist that do mistakes?

[Linnear]

Originally Posted by whitecoat

I am a Pharmacist working in hospital and we have checking technicians, if they make a mistake the NHS shoulders the responsibility not the individual Pharmacist that happens to be in the dispensary when the mistake occurs. Therefore, I do not understand why Pharmacists working in community will have to bear the responsibility if an ACT makes a mistake. Surely like the NHS, this should be down to the company /organisation (Boots, Tesco's, Lloyds etc) or the owner of an independent pharmacy if they decide to employ/train them.

Any opinions?

Whitecoat

You would think it would be the same wouldn't you?

Unfortunately in community every pharmacist stands alone (or that's how it can seem)

There was a certain case (rearrange CASE, PEPPERMINT and WATER) where a pre-reg confused double strenght chloroform water with conc chloroform water. The baby died.

The pre-reg was working in a shop that wasn't licensed for pre-regs and the pharmacist on duty had not been qualified long enough to tutor a pre-reg if they'd wanted to.

Who got prosecuted? The pharmacist and pre-reg.

The head of the stat comm at the time went after the supt pharmacist of the well known chain but couldn't get anywhere near him.


(This last part is available to read on the C&D website, if the information is incorrect I apologise to those involved and would direct them to get the facts straightened at on that website)

(Last statement learned as part of Society bods nearly swallowing their tongues when I mentioned this at an open meeting of the EPB! )


Getting back to the initial topic of this post, I have brought this case up with other EPB members and have been sent a draft document from the Soc that affirms the duties of pharmacists and technicians. Haven't fully read it but it appears to cover pharmacists asses. Unfortunately no-one will know for sure until it goes to court and we get a judge's ruling.

Anyone who wants to read the document:

www.rpsgb.org/pdfs/profstanconsposauth.pdf


What I am now going to try to find out is whether it would be possible to get groundbreaking court cases that may affect all pharmacist defended by Lambeth's legal team.

Wish me luck!

[kemzero]

[I think the most important phrase in the document is personal control for sale & supply - the pharmacists' responsiblity

From what I've read both parties will be held accountable.
As the p'cist has deemed the job fit to be delegated to a registered tech

[whitecoat]

Originally Posted by kemzero

[I think the most important phrase in the document is personal control for sale & supply - the pharmacists' responsiblity

From what I've read both parties will be held accountable.
As the p'cist has deemed the job fit to be delegated to a registered tech

Which Pharmacist has deemed the job fit to be delegated to a registered tech? If I were to locum in community, how can I be sure the tech has been trained properly? Surely this must be down to the trainer ie; Boots, Lloyds, the owner etc. If I ever locum in community, I refuse to be responsible for someone else's mistakes, be they a tech, pharmacist or otherwise.

Whitecoat

[admin]

I think all of this who is responsible for what, ACT responsibility, and remote supervision is making some people ill. I personally know two pharmacists who I think have developed OCD type illnesses due to all this extra stress being added to them.

One guy has to re-open every single script, and re-check it either in front of the driver, or a returning patient, as he's so afraid of making a mistake. He applies this to scripts checked by other pharmacists, and even himself.

The other guy thinks everything is now covered in germs, washes his pens, ruler, hands 20 times an hour, and even wears surgical gloves. He won't even touch the handle of the CD cabinet and flicks it open with a pen.

Obviously anyone can develop these symptoms for various reasons, but it's a sad state of affairs when your job gets you into a state like that.

[Cathedral]

I don't fully understand realms of being a pharmacist in the UK, so I maybe my point of view is not correct, but as I'm thinking of moving to the UK I must say that the whole story upset me a bit. In my country each employee takes personal responsibility for what he or she dispendsed. If I had to watch each step of someone else to avoid being suited for his error I would simply refuse to work with such person! I would rather work on my own.

[admin]

Originally Posted by Cathedral

I don't fully understand realms of being a pharmacist in the UK, so I maybe my point of view is not correct, but as I'm thinking of moving to the UK I must say that the whole story upset me a bit. In my country each employee takes personal responsibility for what he or she dispendsed. If I had to watch each step of someone else to avoid being suited for his error I would simply refuse to work with such person! I would rather work on my own.

You don't have to use acredited checking technicians Cathedral, so if you moved to the UK you could (and will) be responsible for your own work. Don't let this thread put you off, if it's really what you want.

By the way, I managed to fix the International forum!

[Linnear]

One of the EPB has got back to me on my idea of Lambeth representing pharmacists in groundbreaking cases.

Apparently they can't as they're not a trade union!

So in my opinion (That's right Jeff, My Opinion, no fancy lettering or prose)

If Kemzero's right and the pharmacist will be held accountable for the ACTs error because he delegated the job then:



If you don't know the ACT and can't vouch for their ability (even then you might want to think twice) then don't let them check.

and join the PDA which soon will be a trade union.



Sorry if that seems like passing the buck but I've run out of ideas on this one!

[silnarnin]

That idea sounds nice until you work in a pharmacy with 400 walk-in items a day, plus 1000 items a week in the MDS room. The trays for the homes need to be checked because people need to start the medication, and at the same time there's the items to check and people to speak to in the walk-in dispensary.
So one can choose between:
1. keeping the walk-in dispensary open and check the MDS items in the walk-in dispensary between interruptions. (I've had to do this on a saturday morning and it wasn't good)
2. Closing the walk-in dispensary and go to the MDS dispensary to check. (that might not be a good idea)
3. Stay in the walk-in dispensary and not checking the MDS items (hum... imagine that the patients are due to start that medication the following day... they would be without medication...)
4. Let the ACT check the MDS trays. --> I think most pharmacist would choose this one. What would you choose?

[Pharmanaut]

Originally Posted by silnarnin

That idea sounds nice until you work in a pharmacy with 400 walk-in items a day, plus 1000 items a week in the MDS room. The trays for the homes need to be checked because people need to start the medication, and at the same time there's the items to check and people to speak to in the walk-in dispensary.
So one can choose between:
1. keeping the walk-in dispensary open and check the MDS items in the walk-in dispensary between interruptions. (I've had to do this on a saturday morning and it wasn't good)
2. Closing the walk-in dispensary and go to the MDS dispensary to check. (that might not be a good idea)
3. Stay in the walk-in dispensary and not checking the MDS items (hum... imagine that the patients are due to start that medication the following day... they would be without medication...)
4. Let the ACT check the MDS trays. --> I think most pharmacist would choose this one. What would you choose?

To be honest...
I would let some other mug run this show and find a place that is much less stressful.

If they are as busy as that they really need two pharmacists. Saying that we are too expensive is no excuse.