2011 Case 1 Firstly, a card is rarely considered to be open and effective communication. Neither is a drug information sheet.

Both fall short of CoR R5 (and CoE 2.2) as a result. It would be better if someone was there to talk to them to help them understand whats happening, and answer any questions Saying his care might be compromised may be seen as an unfair move to collect information (HIPC R4(b) and CoR R2), as it sounds like cohesion. Therefore, omitting the phrase care might be compromised may be appropriate, but the voluntary bit needs to stay in (HIPC R3(1)(e)). They asked for information which was not related to the care of the patient (HIPC R1), such as religion. They should only stick to asking questions which are important, like their ethnicity, as it is important for determining risk factors etc. The med student received information about the impotency problem, and the patient was not told about their information being used for teaching (CoR R9), the patient should have been advised they may be involved in teaching. Plus its also disclosing patient information which isnt linked to the purposes of healthcare (HIPC R11(1)(c)), and the med student accessed it without the express purpose of treatment (HIPC R10(1)(b)). The doctor changed the meds without consulting with the patient first CoR R6 and 7 as informed consent was not sought. The doctor should have talked to the patient about changing the meds, and make sure they understand why and agree to the changes.

Case 2 Recommending a medication by a pharmacist - MA 1981 s58 (1)(c)(ii)- the pharmacist cannot recommend using a drug. CoE 1.9 commercial interest as well Advertising a controlled drug- MDR 1977 R50(1) means it cant be advertised, unless its to medical practitioners or pharmacists (MDR R50 (2)) and it isnt exempt (R50 (4)). Therefore, the advertisement cant be aired on TV, only distributed to health professionals. Ineffective communication- CoR R5 and 4(2) the pharmacist isnt able to communicate effectively with the patient. Cant give the prescription ethically, as CoE 1.7 prevents us from giving it to them as they dont understand how to use it. Therefore, using an interpretive service will satisfy both CoR R5 and CoE 1.7. Foreign script- MA s18(2) We cant dispense a prescription medication without a script. The tourist needs to go see a NZ doctor to get a NZ prescription, as a medical practicioner is defined as someone who is registered in NZ (MA s2) Midwife scope of practice- HPCAA s8(2), MR r39(1)(a)(ii) - They cant prescribe outside their scope of practice, 4 months is a bit too long. We can sell the medication as OTC after a consultation with the patient, as the drug is pharmacy only in smaller pack sizes.

Case 3 Left the intern in charge MA s42A, should close down the pharmacy while shes out The intern dispensed controlled drugs without supervision: MDA S8(2)(b), this wouldnt have been a problem if the pharmacy was closed during the pharmacists lunch break. Therefore, need to wait for the pharmacist to come back. Left the powder out of the safe MDR R28(1)(a), it needs to be stored in the safe, not left out. Temazepam can be left out because of MDR R28(4)(c). So they can take it out. Recommendation: she should brush up on the law. (CoE 5.5, need to brush up on the law) and CoR 4.2 need to be of legal and ethical standards. Gave out the drugs to a person who might not be the caregiver, MDR R24(2), so giving the grandfather a call is a good idea to make sure hes under his care. Compounding without supervision? MDR R63(2), if the intern was allowed to compound without supervision, then the pharmacist should be around to supervise the dispensing.

Case 4 Antibiotics can be prescribed, as its in their scope of practice, while prescribing OCs is not within their scope of practice HPCAA s8(2) and MR R39(1)(a)(ii). We need to advise the dentist to brush up on his law (CoR 4.2 below legal standard). Phone number missing, MR R41(c)(3), need to adapt to new changes Case 5 GP owned MA s42C(1), recommendation is to obtain a licence so her friend can see if she can own a portion of the pharmacy GP owns the majority share, pharmacist must have control of the company MA 55D(2)(a), so the clause to give control needs to be removed GP offers to write the pharmacys name, CoR Right 2 (right to be free from cohersion) , CoE 2.6 applies if the pharmacist agrees to this arrangement. Therefore, the pads shouldnt CoR R1(2) right to privacy and CoR R5 right to a place of open communication, so they should try to keep the room available

Case 6 Generic substitution is allowed in this case, as the doctor didnt say otherwise (MR R42(4)), can substitute, so pharmacist needs to brush up on his law

Not changing the brand name and not explaining because hes busy (CoE 7.6, he shouldnt put off his duties due to high workload) Dispensed ventolin without script (MA s18(2)), should see a doctor to get a script Dispensed ventolin under MR 44(m), which he shouldnt have done as it wasnt an emergency supply, therefore again, he needs to brush up on his law (CoE 5.5.) CoR 4.2 needed to be of appropriate standard (as always)