Controlled Drug Record-Keeping Failures Lead to 6-Month Suspension for NI Pharmacist
Date of Decision: August 12, 2013
Registrant's Role: Pharmacist
Allegations:
- The registrant instructed a locum pharmacist to supply a Controlled Drug that had already been assembled and entered into the Controlled Drug Register without a valid prescription being available (Patient A).
- The registrant instructed a locum pharmacist to dispense Methadone, a Controlled Drug, to a patient who was not accompanied as required by the prescription (Patient B).
- The registrant failed to properly complete Patient Medication Records (PMR) for a patient receiving Suboxone in that:
- (a) Records were not always made following the dispensing of a valid prescription.
- (b) Records did not accurately reflect the dates of supply endorsed on corresponding prescriptions (Patient C).
- The registrant failed to dispense Diazepam in accordance with the prescribing physician’s instructions (Patient D).
- The registrant failed to dispense Diazepam on set days when directed to dispense twice weekly, contrary to the prescribing physician’s expectations and best practice (Patient E).
- The registrant failed to:
- (a) Maintain an accurate and contemporaneous record in the Controlled Drug Register of the supply of Fentanyl patches (Patient F).
- (b) Follow dispensing directions as authorised by the prescribing physician (Patient F).
Outcome: Suspension for 6 months, with a review prior to expiry.
GPhC Standards Breached:
- Standard 1 – Make the safety and wellbeing of patients your first priority
- Standard 6 – Behave in a professional manner
- Standard 8 – Speak up when you have concerns or when things go wrong
- Standard 9 – Demonstrate leadership
Case Summary
Allegations
This case concerned multiple failings in the management and dispensing of Controlled Drugs and other prescription-only medicines over a period of approximately three months. The registrant, a pharmacist, faced allegations relating to Methadone, Suboxone (buprenorphine/naloxone), Diazepam, and Fentanyl patches — all medicines requiring careful clinical oversight and, in several instances, strict compliance with Controlled Drug legislation.
The most serious allegation involved instructing a locum pharmacist to supply a Controlled Drug that had already been assembled and entered into the Controlled Drug Register without a valid prescription being available (Patient A). This conduct raised immediate legal concerns under the Medicines Act 1968 and Controlled Drug regulations.
Continue Reading the Full Case
Create a free account or log in to access the complete case summary.
- Full allegations considered by the GPhC
- Panel findings and reasoning
- Outcome of the investigation
- Sanctions considered and imposed on the Pharmacist
- Key professional learning points
Note: The original PDF document is not available for this case.
