• Admin Login
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Research Institute in Healthcare Science
    • Research Institute in Healthcare Science
    • View Item
    •   Home
    • Research Institute in Healthcare Science
    • Research Institute in Healthcare Science
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

    All of WIRECommunitiesTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsTypesJournalDepartmentPublisherThis CollectionTitleAuthorsIssue DateSubmit DateSubjectsTypesJournalDepartmentPublisher

    Administrators

    Admin Login

    Local Links

    AboutThe University LibraryOpen Access Publications PolicyDeposit LicenceCOREWIRE Copyright and Reuse Information

    Statistics

    Display statistics

    A longitudinal study of United Kingdom pharmacists' misdemeanours--trials, tribulations and trends.

    • CSV
    • RefMan
    • EndNote
    • BibTex
    • RefWorks
    Average rating
     
       votes
    Cast your vote
    You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item. When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
    Star rating
     
    Your vote was cast
    Thank you for your feedback
    Authors
    Tullett, Julie
    Rutter, Paul M.
    Brown, David
    Issue Date
    2003
    
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    BACKGROUND: Standards of UK pharmacy practice are maintained by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, which has the power to take a range of sanctions, including removal of the right to practice, against those found guilty of malpractice. This function is currently under review. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a longitudinal study in order to define trends and identify areas where remedial or preventative support could be focused. METHOD: Case analysis of reports of individuals' misdemeanours published in the British Pharmaceutical Journal over a 12-year period (September 1988-October 2000). Professional and personal misdemeanours were considered. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Nature of misdemeanour, conviction or disciplinary proceedings against individual, practising pharmacists in the study period. Reasons offered for committing the misdemeanour and penalties applied. RESULTS: 344 cases, involving a wide range of personal (162) and professional (590) misdemeanours were found. On an annual basis, the maximum incidence of pharmacists found guilty of any misdemeanour was extremely low (< 0.1 of 1% on the pharmaceutical register). The most common professional misdemeanour was failure to keep adequate written records. The most common personal misdemeanour was fraud. The most common reason cited for committing any misdemeanour was financial gain. Numbers in individual offence categories were persistent but low and there were few obvious trends with time. The odds of involvement ratio for male versus female pharmacists was 7.36 (CI: 5.23-10.35) and for ethnic minority versus Caucasian pharmacists was 3.8 (CI: 3.06-4.72). The most stringent penalties (either imprisonment or removal of the right to practice and frequently both) were applied to cases involving personal use or trafficking of drugs subject to abuse. CONCLUSIONS: The current self-regulation of pharmacy practice in the UK involves a wide range of misdemeanours of varying severity; but the incidence of reports of pharmacists found guilty of malpractice was extremely low. The nature of misdemeanours appeared to change little over the period of the study; this study therefore indicates the spectrum of misdemeanours likely to be encountered by a regulating board in the immediate to medium-term future. If regulatory changes such as competence-based practice rights are introduced, the spectrum may change.
    Citation
    Pharmacy World & Science, 25 (2): 43-51
    Publisher
    Springer Verlag
    Journal
    Pharmacy World & Science
    URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/2436/29469
    DOI
    10.1023/A:1023288712923
    PubMed ID
    12774563
    Additional Links
    http://www.springerlink.com/content/q0438x7231754p71/
    Type
    Journal article
    Language
    en
    ISSN
    0928-1231
    ae974a485f413a2113503eed53cd6c53
    10.1023/A:1023288712923
    Scopus Count
    Collections
    Research Institute in Healthcare Science

    entitlement

    Related articles

    • Pharmacists subjected to disciplinary action: characteristics and risk factors.
    • Authors: Phipps DL, Noyce PR, Walshe K, Parker D, Ashcroft DM
    • Issue date: 2011 Oct
    • Black and minority ethnic pharmacists' treatment in the UK: A systematic review.
    • Authors: Seston EM, Fegan T, Hassell K, Schafheutle EI
    • Issue date: 2015 Nov-Dec
    • British community pharmacists' views of physician-assisted suicide (PAS).
    • Authors: Hanlon TR, Weiss MC, Rees J
    • Issue date: 2000 Oct
    • Pharmacist misconduct: the pitfalls of practice.
    • Authors: Kiel H
    • Issue date: 2005 Feb
    • Developments in pharmacists' disciplinary processes and outcomes.
    • Authors: Hattingh L, Smith N, Searle J, Forrester K
    • Issue date: 2008 Aug

    DSpace software (copyright © 2002 - 2021)  DuraSpace
    Quick Guide | Contact Us
    Open Repository is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV
     

    Export search results

    The export option will allow you to export the current search results of the entered query to a file. Different formats are available for download. To export the items, click on the button corresponding with the preferred download format.

    By default, clicking on the export buttons will result in a download of the allowed maximum amount of items.

    To select a subset of the search results, click "Selective Export" button and make a selection of the items you want to export. The amount of items that can be exported at once is similarly restricted as the full export.

    After making a selection, click one of the export format buttons. The amount of items that will be exported is indicated in the bubble next to export format.