Complaints Outcomes

Search

Search Results

Search Again
Pharmacy Technician Registrant 5 (Jun 1, 2021)

The Inquiry Committee has reinstated pharmacy technician registrant’s registration which had previously been suspended for an indefinite period on May 14, 2020. Pursuant to Section 32.2(4)(b)(i) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached an Agreement with the pharmacy technician registrant whereby the pharmacy technician registrant consented to terms including, but not limited to, the following:

  1. To comply with any and all recommendations and treatment prescribed or directed by medical professionals involved in the pharmacy technician registrant's care;
     
  2. To comply with any and all work plans and gradual return to work protocols as advised by pharmacy technician registrant's medical professionals and/or employers;
     
  3. To strictly adhere to the pharmacy technician registrant's routine medical monitoring program for a total period of 2 years of monitoring;
     
  4. To not order, handle, prepare, dispense or destroy any narcotic or sedating substances the pharmacy technician registrant may have access to while being medically monitored;
     
  5. To inform the College in via e-mail of the pharmacy technician registrant's places of employment as a pharmacy technician and report any changes to the location of their employment within 48 hours of such change;
     
  6. To inform all managers and employers with whom the pharmacy technician registrant gains employment of the limits and conditions on registration pursuant to the Agreement, if the pharmacy dispenses narcotic or sedating drugs;
     
  7. To ensure that all managers and employers with whom the pharmacy technician registrant gains employment submits a written statement to the College declaring their awareness of the limits and conditions on registration pursuant to the Agreement, if the pharmacy dispenses narcotic or sedating drugs;

The pharmacy technician registrant’s name has been withheld pursuant to section 39.3(4)(a) of the Health Professions Act.


May 14, 2020
(June 1, 2021 - Registrant Reinstated)


The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to s. 32.2(4)(b)(ii) of the Health Professions Act, has reached an agreement with the pharmacy technician registrant to voluntarily suspend the registration as a pharmacy technician effective May 14, 2020. The Agreement remains in effect until further notice. The Inquiry Committee considers the Agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacy technician registrant's name has been withheld pursuant to section 39.3(4)(a) of the Health Professions Act.

Pharmacist Registrant 34 (Apr 28, 2021)

Pursuant to Section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached a new Agreement with the pharmacist registrant whereby the registrant consented to terms including, but not limited to, the following:

  1. To comply with any and all recommendations and treatment prescribed or directed by the physician; and
  2. To attend regular appointments with the physician and comply with random monitoring.  

This Agreement will remain in place until such a time as the pharmacist registrant is reassessed and further recommendations to continue or terminate appointments and/or random monitoring are made by the physician. The name of the pharmacist registrant has been withheld in accordance with Section 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act.  


May 6, 2020
(April 28, 2021 - Limits and Conditions Updated)

Pursuant to Section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached a new Agreement with the pharmacist registrant whereby the registrant consented to terms including, but not limited to, the following:

  1. To comply with any and all recommendations and treatment prescribed or directed by the physician; and
     
  2. To attend group meetings, consultations with specialists, and regular monitoring for a period of once year.

This Agreement will remain in place until such a time as the pharmacist registrant is reassessed and further recommendations to continue or terminate consultations and/or regular monitoring are made by the physician. The name of the pharmacist registrant has been withheld in accordance with Section 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act.  


July 4, 2018
(May 6, 2020 - Limits and Conditions Updated)

The Inquiry Committee has reinstated pharmacist registrant’s registration which had previously be suspended for an indefinite period on February 10, 2018.  Pursuant to section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached an Agreement with the pharmacist registrant whereby the Registrant consented to undertakings.  The undertakings include, but are not limited to:

  1. The Registrant will comply with any and all recommendations and treatment prescribed or directed by physician; and
     
  2. The Registrant will follow a regular monitoring program for medical condition for a two year period.  

The Agreement will remain in place until such time as the Registrant’s physician states otherwise. The name of the Registrant has been withheld in accordance with section 39.3(4) and (6) of the Health Professions Act for the purposes of not identifying the personal health information of the Registrant. The Inquiry Committee is satisfied that the undertakings will protect the public. 


February 10, 2018
(July 4, 2018 - Registration reinstated)

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to section 36 of the Health Professions Act, has reached an Agreement with pharmacist registrant to suspend registration as a pharmacist for an indefinite period pending further decision of the Inquiry Committee. The Inquiry Committee considers the Agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacist registrant's name has been withheld pursuant to 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act

Petterson, Ian Douglas (Apr 27, 2021)
  1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (“CPBC”) conducted an investigation into the practice of Ian Petterson (the “Former Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183. The Inquiry Committee and the Former Registrant have agreed to resolve all matters arising from the investigation by way of a Consent Agreement under section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act.

  2. Effective date: April 27, 2021

  3. Name of registrant: Ian Douglas Petterson

  4. Location of Practice: N/A

  5. Admissions and acknowledgements:

    Between at least 2011 and 2018, the Former Registrant diverted pharmacy supplies, including prescription medications, from a hospital pharmacy. The Former Registrant sold the diverted supplies to a community pharmacist in exchange for cash payments and did not deposit the funds obtained from sales into hospital accounts.

    Evidence in the form of emails and software reports appeared to indicate the Former Registrant transferred prescription medications to the community pharmacy without properly recording the transactions.

    Evidence in the form of emails and text messages appeared to indicate the Former Registrant circumvented hospital processes to divert the supplies from the hospital pharmacy. The evidence appeared to indicate the Former Registrant took steps to conceal his actions. The Former Registrant is likely to have benefited financially and professionally from the diversion and sale of the hospital supplies.

  1. Disposition:

    The Former Registrant entered into a Consent Agreement with the Inquiry Committee, wherein the Former Registrant consented to terms that include (but are not limited to) the following:

    1. To suspend his registration as a pharmacist for a total of 365 days to commence from the date his registration is reinstated to Full Pharmacist;

    2. To not be pharmacy manager, director or officer of a pharmacy for a period of three (3) years following the completion of his suspension;

    3. To not be a preceptor or supervisor of pharmacy students or international pharmacy graduates for a period of three (3) years following the completion of his suspension;

    4. To complete and successfully pass an ethics course for healthcare professionals;

    5. To complete and successfully pass the CPBC’s Jurisprudence Exam;

    6. To have a letter of reprimand placed on CPBC’s register indefinitely; 

    7. To appear before the Inquiry Committee for a verbal reprimand; and

    8. To pay a fine of $35,000.

  2. Rationale:

    The Inquiry Committee considered that in this case, the evidence indicated the Former Registrant repeatedly diverted hospital pharmacy supplies over a prolonged period of time and sold them for cash to a community pharmacist. The Inquiry Committee identified that the hospital had policies and procedures in place to prevent theft and diversion, and that the Former Registrant circumvented these processes by using his title and status within the hospital.

    The Inquiry Committee determined that the Former Registrant took steps to conceal his conduct, and in doing so, repeatedly broke the trust placed in him by his peers and colleagues. The Inquiry Committee noted that the Former Registrant’s pattern of conduct appeared deliberate and intentional. Further, the Inquiry Committee noted the Former Registrant was employed by a publicly funded institution at the time of the incidents, and therefore the Former Registrant’s actions were a violation of the trust placed in him by society as a whole.

    The Inquiry Committee concluded the Former Registrant’s actions were a serious contravention of standards in the Code of Ethics as well as the Pharmacy Operations and Drug Scheduling Act. The Inquiry Committee concluded the Former Registrant’s actions compromised the public’s trust in the pharmacy profession. The Inquiry Committee therefore determined that the Former Registrant required serious remediation and deterrence regarding his conduct. The Inquiry Committee considered the terms of the Consent Agreement appropriate to protect the public, as well as send a clear message of deterrence to the profession.

Yan, Cheryl Qian (Apr 25, 2021)

Pursuant to s. 36(1) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached a revised Agreement with Ms. Yan, whereby commencing March 21, 2021, for a specified period of time she must abide by certain limits and conditions on her practice, and she must disclose these limits and conditions to future employers. These limits and conditions include (but are not limited to):

  • Working under direct supervision of a BC pharmacist in good standing;
  • Not working alone;
  • Not being a supervisor, manager, and/or preceptor;
  • Informing employers and the College in writing regarding any medication-related incidents and/or errors that she is involved in; and
  • Notifying the College in writing regarding any changes in employment.

The Inquiry Committee considers these actions necessary to protect the public.


August 10, 2017
(April 25, 2021 - Limits and Conditions Updated)

The Inquiry Committee has deemed Cheryl Qian Yan eligible for reinstatement of her registration, as she has completed and passed the Canadian Pharmacy Practice Programme pursuant to the terms of the Agreement reached on February 24, 2015.

Pursuant to s. 36(1) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached a revised Agreement with Ms. Yan, whereby after the reinstatement of her registration, for a specified period of time she must abide by certain limits and conditions on her practice, and she must disclose these limits and conditions to future employers. These limits and conditions include (but are not limited to):

  • Working under direct supervision of a BC pharmacist in good standing;
  • Not working alone;
  • Not being a supervisor, manager, and/or preceptor;
  • Informing employers and the College in writing regarding any medication-related incidents and/or errors that she is involved in; and
  • Notifying the College in writing regarding any changes in employment.

The Inquiry Committee considers these actions necessary to protect the public.


February 24, 2015
(August 10, 2017 – Registration reinstated)

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to Section 36 of the Health Professions Act, has reached an agreement with Ms. Cheryl Qian Yan where she has voluntarily suspended her pharmacy licence until she has completed and passed the Canadian Pharmacy Practice Programme, and then she will be subject to placing limits and/or conditions on her practice as follows depending on the setting:

  1. If a Hospital Pharmacy or Affiliated Hospital setting:

     

    1. Ms. Yan must work under the direct supervision of a BC licensed pharmacist for a period to three (3) months full time equivalent; where with the current contract, a full time week is 37.5 hours with 7.5 hour work days; and

       

    2. Ms. Yan must not work in a hospital pharmacy or an affiliated pharmacy setting as a pharmacist in a sole practitioner capacity. This means that Ms. Yan must not supervise anyone, direct work, be a manager or a preceptor or pharmacist in charge, for a period to three (3) months full time equivalent; where with the current contract, a full time week is 37.5 hours with 7.5 hour work days.

     

  2. If a Community Pharmacy setting:

     

    1. Ms. Yan will be restricted to process no more than sixty (60) prescriptions daily, within an eight (8) hour shift for a period equivalent to six (6) months full time;

       

    2. Ms. Yan must work under the direct supervision of a BC licensed pharmacist for a period equivalent to three (3) months full time, based on 8 hours per day / 40 hours per week or a total of 480 hours;

       

    3. Ms. Yan must not work in a community pharmacy as a pharmacist in a sole practitioner capacity. This means that Ms. Yan must not supervise anyone, direct work, be a manager or a preceptor or pharmacist in charge, for a period equivalent to three (3) months full time, based on 8 hours per day /40 hours per week or a total of 480 hours; and

       

    4. Ms. Yan will be subject to a practice audit in a community pharmacy of which she must complete and pass during the above six (6) months period mentioned in the above paragraphs 2 (b) and 2 (c).

The Inquiry Committee considers these actions necessary to protect the public.

Pharmacy Technician Registrant 6 (Apr 19, 2021)

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to s. 32.2(4)(b)(ii) of the Health Professions Act, has reached an agreement with the pharmacy technician registrant to voluntarily suspend the registration as a pharmacy technician effective April 20, 2021. The Agreement remains in effect until further notice. The Inquiry Committee considers the Agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacy technician registrant’s name has been withheld pursuant to section 39.3(4)(a) of the Health Professions Act.

Pharmacist Registrant 6 (Apr 18, 2021)

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to section 32.2(4)(b)(ii) of the Health Professions Act, has reached an Agreement with the pharmacist registrant to voluntarily suspend their registration as a pharmacist effective April 18, 2021. The Agreement remains in effect until further notice. The Inquiry Committee considers the Agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacist registrant’s name has been withheld pursuant to section 39.3(4)(a) of the Health Professions Act.


February 20, 2015
(April 18, 2021 - Registration suspended)

Pharmacist Registrant 6 has satisfied the terms of an agreement reached with the Inquiry Committee dated October 3, 2010. Limits and conditions on pharmacist registrant’s registration as a pharmacist have now been removed. The pharmacist registrant’s name has been withheld pursuant to 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act.


October 3, 2010
(February 20, 2015 - Limits and conditions removed)

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to Section 36 of the Health Professions Act, has reached an agreement with pharmacist registrant to place limits and/or conditions on his registration as a pharmacist effective October 3, 2010. The agreement remains in effect until further notice. The Inquiry Committee considers the agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacist registrant's name has been withheld pursuant to 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act

Khun-Khun, Amandeep Singh (Apr 13, 2021)
  1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (“CPBC”) conducted an investigation into the practice of now former registrant Amandeep Singh Khun-Khun (the “Former Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183. The Inquiry Committee and the Former Registrant have agreed to resolve all matters arising from the investigation by way of a Consent Agreement under section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act.

  2. Effective date: April 13, 2021

  3. Name of registrant: Amandeep Singh Khun-Khun

  4. Location of Practice: N/A

  5. Admissions and acknowledgements:

    Between April 2014 and October 2017, the Former Registrant used a physician’s name and license number to create prescription authorizations for himself, without that physician’s knowledge or consent. Records indicated that the Former Registrant used the physician’s name to create nine prescription authorizations totalling 75 dispensed transactions. The prescription authorizations included Schedule I drugs, Over-The-Counter supplements, and medical supplies. The Former Registrant was not in possession of a valid order from a physician at the time of creating and/or dispensing these prescriptions.

    The Former Registrant was also found to have prescribed and dispensed drug therapy for himself. Records identified that the Former Registrant’s PharmaNet profile included 1,010 entries where he was both the receiving patient and the dispensing pharmacist, and 159 entries indicating he was both the receiving patient, dispensing pharmacist and authorizing practitioner.

  1. Disposition:

    The Former Registrant entered into a Consent Agreement with the Inquiry Committee, wherein the Former Registrant consented to terms that include (but are not limited to) the following:

    1. To suspend his registration as a pharmacist for a total of 1825 days (5 years) to commence immediately on the date any other previous suspensions are completed;

    2. To have a letter of reprimand placed on CPBC’s register permanently; and

    3. To pay a fine of $15,000.

  2. Rationale:

    The Inquiry Committee considered that in this case, the Former Registrant’s conduct was a serious breach of legislative standards and the CPBC’s Code of Ethics. The Inquiry Committee determined the Former Registrant’s use of the physician’s name and license number without the physician’s consent violated the trust that healthcare practitioners place in each other when serving patients. CPBC registrants are required to act with honesty and integrity in all professional relationships, and the Former Registrant’s actions were contrary to this expectation.

    Further, the Inquiry Committee determined the Former Registrant’s self-prescribing and self-dispensing of treatment was concerning and could have placed his own health at risk. The Inquiry Committee noted that CPBC registrants are prohibited from self-prescribing and self-dispensing treatment unless in extenuating circumstances. The Inquiry Committee was not satisfied the Former Registrant’s circumstances met the threshold to self-prescribe and self-dispense treatment.

    The Inquiry Committee determined the Former Registrant’s actions were unprofessional, unethical and compromised trust in the pharmacy profession.

    The Inquiry Committee therefore determined that the Former Registrant required serious remediation and deterrence regarding his conduct. The Inquiry Committee considered the terms of the Consent Agreement appropriate to protect the public, as well as send a clear message of deterrence to the profession.


June 12, 2019
  1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (the “College”) conducted an investigation into the practice of now former registrant Amandeep Singh Khun-Khun (the “Former Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183. The Inquiry Committee and the Former Registrant have agreed to resolve all matters arising from the investigation by way of a Consent Agreement under section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act.

  2. Effective date: June 12, 2019

  3. Name of registrant: Amandeep Singh Khun-Khun

  4. Location of Practice: Vancouver, BC

  5. Admissions and Acknowledgements:

    Between January 1, 2014 and November 5, 2017, over 15,000 transactions for over-the-counter (“OTC”) and/or vitamin products were processed on a daily or weekly basis on the PharmaNet records of seven individuals. These seven individuals were not prescribed and had not received any of the OTC and/or vitamin products processed on their PharmaNet records. Most of the seven individuals stated that they had not willingly consented to having these transactions on their PharmaNet records.

    These transactions all originated from a pharmacy where the Former Registrant was the pharmacy manager and owner.

    The Former Registrant admitted that he had directed pharmacy assistants to process transactions weekly on PharmaNet in order to artificially inflate the pharmacy’s prescription count. The pharmacy assistants used the registration numbers of various pharmacist registrants as the dispensing pharmacist and/or prescriber for each transaction. The majority of pharmacy registrants stated that their registration numbers were used without their willing consent or knowledge. Many of these transactions were also backdated.

    The Former Registrant’s actions and direction enabled the inappropriate access and use of PharmaNet records, enabled the inappropriate access and use of pharmacist registration numbers, and caused PharnaNet records to be inaccurate and not current.

  6. Disposition:

    The Former Registrant entered into a Consent Agreement with the College’s Inquiry Committee, wherein the Former Registrant consented to the following terms: 

    1. To suspend his registration as a pharmacist for a total of 540 days, to commence upon his reinstatement to Full Pharmacist status;

    2. To not be a pharmacy manager, director, owner (direct or indirect), shareholder, and preceptor for pharmacy students for a period of five years from the date that his suspension ends;
       
    3. To successfully pass the College’s Jurisprudence Exam;

    4. To successfully complete and pass an ethics course for healthcare professionals; and.

    5. To pay a $30,000.00 fine.

  7. Rationale:

    The Inquiry Committee considered that the Former Registrant’s intentional directing of weekly transactions which enabled the processing of over 15,000 false prescriptions on PharmaNet involved significant breaches of confidentiality and trust. The fact that his actions led to an inflated prescription count, from which the Inquiry Committee believed he gained financial and personal benefit, made his conduct even more serious.

    His actions were considered serious contraventions of legislation involving use and protection of personal information, appropriate use and access of PharmaNet and patient records, supervision of pharmacy assistants, and his role as a pharmacy manager. He also contravened standards of the Code of Ethics involving protecting and promoting the well-being of patients, benefitting society, committing to personal and professional integrity, and participating in ethical business practices. The Inquiry Committee also considered that the Former Registrant had previously consented to remedial undertakings to fully comply with ethical requirements, and he had breached these undertakings for this current matter. The totality of the Former Registrant’s serious, intentional, and repeated conduct amounted to significant professional misconduct, and the Inquiry Committee considered that the Former Registrant required the above-referred-to remediation and deterrence in order to come into compliance.

    The Inquiry Committee considered the terms of the Consent Agreement necessary to protect the public, as well as send a clear message of deterrence to the profession. Inappropriate access and use of personal information, especially without consent, compromises the public’s trust in the pharmacy profession as a whole. At all times, registrants must uphold legislative requirements and ethical obligations to appropriately access, use, and protect personal information.

Dammeyer, Christopher William (Apr 8, 2021)
  1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (the “College”) conducted an investigation into the practice of Christopher William Dammeyer (the “Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183.

    The Inquiry Committee and the Registrant have agreed to resolve all matters arising from the investigation by way of a Consent Agreement under section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act.

  2. Effective date: April 8, 2021

  3. Name of registrant: Christopher William Dammeyer

  4. Location of Practice: Vancouver, BC

  5. The College’s investigation:

    Multiple registrants were involved in this matter.

    The College’s investigation found that between January 2012 and June 2018, over 20,000 false transactions were processed on patient PharmaNet records at two pharmacies, where the Registrant had worked at both pharmacies as a pharmacist and at one pharmacy as a pharmacy manager.

    These transactions were considered false because:

    • Schedule I (prescription) medications associated with these transactions had not been authorized or prescribed by the prescriber associated with each transaction;
    • Medications associated with these transactions, which included Schedule I, Over-The-Counter (“OTC) medications and vitamins, were not actually dispensed to the “patient” in each case;
    • Transactions were processed as one-day supplies or seven-day supplies, for the sole purpose of artificially inflating prescription counts; and
    • Transactions were processed not for the purpose of providing health care and were not processed with each patient’s voluntary consent.


    The College’s investigation also found that during the same time period, over 10,000 transactions were processed on patient PharmaNet records for medications that were actually authorized but processed as one-day supplies or seven-day supplies when there was no clinical indication to do so. The medications for these transactions were not actually dispensed to the patient on a daily or weekly basis, making each patient’s PharmaNet records inaccurate and not current. These transactions were processed in this manner for the sole purpose of artificially inflating prescription counts.

    The “patients” whose PharmaNet records were affected were all either current or former employees of the two pharmacies, or family members of former employees of the two pharmacies. Reportedly, the owner of the two pharmacies had directed for transactions to be processed in the above manner in order to artificially inflate prescription counts at both pharmacies.

  1. The Registrant’s involvement and acknowledgements:

    Regarding the Registrant’s involvement in this matter, the Inquiry Committee considered it substantiated, and the Registrant has acknowledged, that:

    1. He processed false transactions for Schedule I and OTC/vitamin medications on his own PharmaNet record and on the PharmaNet records of his colleagues;

    2. He processed one-day or seven-day supply transactions for Schedule I and OTC/vitamin medications on the PharmaNet records of his colleagues and colleagues’ family members, where these medications were not actually dispensed to the patient on a daily basis, making the patient’s PharmaNet records inaccurate and not current; were all processed as one-day supplies for the sole purpose of artificially inflating prescription counts; and were not clinically indicated to be dispensed on a daily basis;

    3. He backdated PharmaNet transactions, meaning that the transaction records were created on a date later than the date that appears on PharmaNet;

    4. He billed the false and inaccurate transactions described above to PharmaCare and/or third-party insurance plans, when he knew these to be false or misleading claims;

    5. He processed medications on PharmaNet for himself;

    6. He inappropriately used personal health information and created inaccurate PharmaNet records, placing himself, his colleagues, and his colleagues’ family members at risk of harm, in case their PharmaNet records ever needed to be accessed for legitimate medical reasons;

    7. He failed to report to the College or to another person of authority regarding the improper practices occurring at the two pharmacies, even though he knew that these practices were improper; and

    8. As a pharmacy manager, he enabled the false transactions on patient PharmaNet records, prioritized meeting quotas and targets over patient safety and compliance with legislation, and did not set or enforce policies and procedures at the pharmacy he was managing to ensure compliance with practice standards.

  2. Disposition:

    The Registrant entered into a Consent Agreement with the College’s Inquiry Committee, wherein the Registrant consented to the following terms (in part):

    1. To successfully complete and pass an ethics course for healthcare professionals within two years. If he fails to complete this within the specified time period, his registration will be suspended for a period of 60 days;

    2. To appear before the Inquiry Committee for a verbal reprimand after completion of the ethics course;

    3. To have a letter of reprimand placed permanently on the College register;

    4. To not be a pharmacy manager and/or a preceptor for pharmacy students for a period of one year from April 8, 2021 to April 7, 2022;

    5. To pay a $3000.00 fine;

    6. To successfully pass the College’s Jurisprudence Exam; and

    7. To successfully complete and pass the “BC Community Pharmacy Manager Training Program” offered by the British Columbia Pharmacy Association, if resuming employment as a pharmacist.

  3. Rationale:

    The Registrant’s actions were considered serious contraventions of legislation involving pharmacy practice standards, the appropriate access, use and protection of personal health information and PharmaNet records, and his role as a pharmacy manager. His misconduct placed himself and others at risk of harm. The Registrant also contravened standards of the Code of Ethics involving protecting and promoting the well-being of patients, benefitting society, committing to personal and professional integrity, participating in ethical business practices, and conflicts of interest.

    In determining an appropriate disposition for the Registrant, the Inquiry Committee considered the Registrant’s report of feeling pressured by his employer (the pharmacy owner) to commit these actions, and that he personally did not stand to gain financially from what occurred.

    The Inquiry Committee considered the terms of the Consent Agreement necessary to protect the public, as well as send a clear message of deterrence to the profession. Inappropriate access and use of personal health information compromises the public’s trust in the pharmacy profession as a whole. At all times, registrants must uphold legislative requirements and ethical obligations to appropriately access, use and protect personal health information.

Mbamy, Joelle (Apr 7, 2021)

The Registrant has completed all remedial training necessary for the removal of limits and conditions on her practice. Limits and conditions on the Registrant’s registration as a pharmacist have been removed effective April 7, 2021.


October 26, 2020
(April 7, 2021 - Limits and Conditions Removed)
 
  1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (“CPBC”) conducted investigations into the practice of Joelle Mbamy (the “Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”).  The CPBC issued a Citation on October 21, 2019, which was subsequently amended on January 29, 2020.

    Further to a proposal for resolution from the Registrant, the Inquiry Committee made a Consent Order under section 37.1 of the HPA.

  2. Effective date: October 26, 2020

  3. Name of registrant: Joelle Mbamy

  4. Location of Practice: Penticton, BC

  5. Admissions and acknowledgements:

    The Registrant has admitted and/or acknowledged the following (in part):

    The Inspection

    On November 6, 2018, the CPBC conducted an inspection of Sunrise Pharmacy (the “Inspection”) where the Registrant was acting as an owner, manager, and working pharmacist. The Inspection was conducted pursuant to a Consent Agreement the Registrant entered into with the CPBC on May 1, 2018, regarding a previous complaint and investigation.

    Contrary to Standards 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 9 of the Health Professions Act – Bylaws, Schedule “A” – the Code of Ethics (“Code of Ethics”), the Registrant was observed to have failed to comply with the terms of the Consent Agreement as during the Inspection, the following conduct was observed that constitutes a breach of the terms of the Consent Agreement:

    In addition, during the Inspection, the following conduct was observed which constituted additional or new offences, not previously addressed in the Consent Agreement:
     

    Pharmacy Security

    On March 22, 2018, the CPBC received information from the Province’s Child Death Coroner regarding the death of a minor who, at the time of his death, was an employee at Sunrise Pharmacy. The cause of death was methadone overdose.

    Upon reviewing security camera recordings from Sunrise Pharmacy, it was determined that, on September 18, 2017 and contrary to Standards 1 (a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 18(2)(j), 19(4) and 26 of the PODSA Bylaws, and Professional Practice Policy 74: Community Pharmacy and Telepharmacy Security, the minor was permitted to be in the dispensary and the compounding rooms in Sunrise Pharmacy without supervision on thirteen separate occasions for varying lengths of time.

    During these times, the minor had access to prescription medications. However, there was no evidence on the security footage to confirm that the minor obtained the methadone from the pharmacy.

    Temporary Closure of Sunrise Pharmacy

    In July 2019, the CPBC received a complaint about and conducted an investigation into the temporary closure of Sunrise Pharmacy on three consecutive Saturdays in June 2019 and found that

    1. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 6, 9, and 9.1 of Part 1 of Schedule “F” – the Standards of Practice (the “Part 1 of the Standards of Practice”), Professional Practice Policy 66: Opioid Agonist Treatment, and Principles 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.2.4 Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), Ms. Mbamy was dispensing methadone or Opioid Agonist Treatment (“OAT”) without the appropriate directions or without appropriate completion of the required documentation or both
       
    2. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, section 19(5)(a) of the CPBC’s Bylaws under PODSA (the “PODSA Bylaws”), and Professional Practice Policy 31: Emergency Prescription Refills, the Registrant was dispensing medication without a prescription, using her name as a prescriber, and in a manner that did not comply with the requirements for an emergency prescription refill;

    3. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, section 11 of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, and section 35 of the PODSA Bylaws, prescriptions, including prescriptions for methadone and other Schedule 1 drugs, were “backdated” such that the dispensing date entered on PharmaNet or recorded on the prescription label did not accurately reflect the date those prescriptions were dispensed; and

    4. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 18(2)(j) and 26 of the PODSA Bylaws, Professional Practice Policy-74: Community Pharmacy and Telepharmacy Security, and section 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, the Registrant failed to store methadone in a time-lock safe, or she stored methadone in a time-lock safe that was left open.

    5. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics and sections 8 and 11 of the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-27, the Registrant prepared an intravenous solution in an unsanitary and non-sterile environment without taking precautions to avoid contamination of the drug product and dispensed that solution to the patient’s agent;
       
    6. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, and sections 19(2) and 20(4) of the PODSA Bylaws, expired drugs were not stored in a separate area or secured storage area within Sunrise Pharmacy;

    7. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics,  Professional Practice Policy 68: Cold Chain Management of Biologicals, and the BCCDC Communicable Disease Control Immunization Program: Section VI – Management of Biologicals, vaccines and insulin were stored in the door of a refrigerator;

    8. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 9, 9.1, and 11(1) and (2) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, Professional Practice Policy 66: Opioid Agonist Treatment, and Principles 3.1.3, 3.2.4, and 3.2.5 of Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), information regarding prescriptions recorded on PharmaNet was incorrect or incomplete. 

    9. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics, section 19(6)(b) of the PODSA Bylaws, Principle 2.1.2, of Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), the Registrant was selling or dispensing drugs included in the controlled prescription program (“CPP”) when the required CPP form did not contain either the signature of the dispensing pharmacist or the signature of the patient;

    10. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics and Professional Practice Policy 31: Emergency Prescription Refills, emergency prescription refills were improperly provided or documented;

    11. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 6(4)(g)(iv) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice the Sunrise Pharmacy patient counselling log did not include written confirmation of who performed consultations or document when consultation was offered and declined;

    12. contrary to Standards 1 (a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics and sections 35(1), (4), (5), and (6) of the PODSA Bylaws and with respect to a specific prescription dated August 9, 2018, the PharmaNet patient record was not kept current; and

    13. contrary to Standards 1 (a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics, and section 18(2)(m) of the PODSA Bylaws, staff at Sunrise Pharmacy did not wear name badges.

    14. contrary to section 25.92 of the HPA, and sections 10(1) and (2) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, the Registrant, without prior authorization, changed the dispensing regime of four different methadone prescriptions in order to accommodate the closure of Sunrise Pharmacy,

    15. contrary to Principle 2.2.1 of Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), the Registrant altered a prescription and began dispensing methadone pursuant to that altered prescription and failed to obtain a corrected prescription from the physician, and

    16. contrary to section 9.1(1)(b) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, the Registrant dispensed Suboxone® with incorrect instructions on the label.

  6. Disposition:

    In the Consent Order under section 37.1 of the HPA, the Inquiry Committee ordered that the Registrant

    The Registrant repeatedly contravened sections of the HPA, PODSA Bylaws, Community Pharmacy Standards of Practice, and the Code of Ethics in her practice as a pharmacist, pharmacy manager, owner and director, and thereby, neglected her basic duties as a pharmacist, and committed or allowed actions that were unethical and could potentially endanger patient health. The totality of her conduct demonstrated an egregious breach of trust and undermines the integrity of the profession.

    Importantly, the Inspection was conducted only a few month after the Consent Agreement was finalized. Despite this, Ms. Mbamy was found to be in breach of several of the terms of that Consent Agreement and was noted to have engaged in further breaches of the standards applying to the practice of pharmacy. This demonstrated a disregard for the fundamentals of pharmacy practice and the CPBC’s regulatory process. More importantly, it presented a significant risk to the public.

    The Registrant’s conduct in this instance, coupled with the breach of her previous undertakings, is considered significant professional misconduct as defined in s. 26 of the HPA, and justifies serious consequences. The Inquiry Committee therefore considered it appropriate, and the Registrant agreed, that the disposition for such conduct be one that serves as a strong deterrent and sends a clear message to both the profession and the public that the CPBC cannot and will not tolerate this type of conduct under any circumstances.

    1. sign and deliver to the CPBC a letter of undertaking,

    2. be suspended for 3 months (November 18, 2020 to February 18, 2021),
       
    3. subject to paragraph d below, for a period of 18 months (including the time during which she had been subject to the same conditions on practice further to the May 23, 2019 Inquiry Committee order), cannot
       
      1. dispense any narcotic or controlled drug substance intended for Opioid Agonist Treatment,
         
      2. compound any medication, or

      3. prepare or dispense any medication intended for intravenous administration.

    4. before the conditions specified in paragraph c are removed from her practice, must, at her own expense,

      1. retake and successfully complete
         
        • the BC Pharmacy Association OAT Compliance and Management Program, and

        • the BC Community Manger Training Program,

      2. successfully complete;

        • the CPEP PROBE: Ethics & Boundaries Program,

        • the UBC CPD Provincial Opioid Addiction Treatment Support Program,

        • the Critical Point, Best Practices for Nonhazardous Sterile-to-Sterile Compounding, and

      3. confirm in writing that she has

        • read “A Guideline for Clinical Management of Opioid Use Disorder” from the BC Centre on Substance Use, and

        • reviewed the YouTube videos, Ontario College of Pharmacists, “Optimizing Patient Care Series: Decision Making & Documentation – Keeping it Simple”, Parts 1 and 2,

    5. must pay a fine of $20,000 to the CPBC


May 23, 2019
(October 26, 2020 - Citation cancelled)

 

Pursuant to section 35(1)(a) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”), effective May 23, 2019, the Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia has made an order to impose limits and conditions on the pharmacy practice of the registrant Joelle Mbamy (the “Registrant”) pending a hearing of the Discipline Committee.

The Registrant will be restricted from dispensing any narcotic or controlled drug substance intended for Opioid Agonist Treatment. This limit and condition will become effective on June 7, 2019 to allow sufficient time to transition patients to another pharmacy.

The Registrant will be restricted from compounding any medication and preparing or dispensing any medication intended for intravenous administration.

The Inquiry Committee considered this action necessary to protect the public.

While practicing as a pharmacist, the Registrant is alleged to have shown a continuing pattern of providing Opioid Agonist Treatment without abiding by the legislative requirements. While practicing as a pharmacist, the Registrant is alleged to have prepared and dispensed intravenous drug product under unsanitary conditions.

Note: Limits and conditions ordered by the Inquiry Committee under section 35(1)(a) of the HPA are made to protect the public during an investigation or pending a hearing of the Discipline Committee. Orders made under this section relate to matters which are and remain unproven unless admitted by a registrant or determined by the Discipline Committee.

Sidhu, Rauvan Singh (Apr 6, 2021)
  1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (the “College”) conducted an investigation into the practice of Rauvan Singh Sidhu (the “Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183. The Inquiry Committee and the Registrant have agreed to resolve all matters arising from the investigation by way of a Consent Agreement under section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act.

  2. Effective date: April 6, 2021

  3. Name of registrant: Rauvan Singh Sidhu

  4. Location of Practice: Surrey, BC

  5. Admissions and Acknowledgements: The Registrant has admitted and/or acknowledged the following:

Between January 1, 2013 and December 31, 2014, while he was the pharmacy manager, owner, and director of a pharmacy, he billed Blood Glucose Test Strips (“BGTS”) on the PharmaNet records of multiple patients for which the purchase invoices for BGTS were insufficient to support the quantities billed. In making these false billings, the Registrant created inaccurate PharmaNet records.

Furthermore, the Registrant initially provided false information to PharmaCare auditors when they requested information regarding his BGTS purchases for the purposes of a PharmaCare audit.

  1. Disposition:

    The Registrant entered into a Consent Agreement with the College's Inquiry Committee, wherein the Registrant consented to the following terms (in part):

    1. To successfully complete and pass an ethics course for healthcare professionals;

    2. To have a letter of reprimand placed permanently on the College register;

    3. To be suspended as a registrant of the College for a period of 90 consecutive days, commencing June 7, 2021 to September 4, 2021; and

    4. To not be a pharmacy manager, direct or indirect owner of a pharmacy, and/or a preceptor for pharmacy students for a period of one year (April 6, 2021 to April 5, 2022).

  2. Rationale:

    The Inquiry Committee considered that the Registrant did not act with honesty and integrity, and that his conduct would reasonably be regarded by registrants and members of the public as professional misconduct. The misconduct of the Registrant was of a serious nature and that Registrant should have known that his conduct was unbecoming of a pharmacist.

    The Inquiry Committee considered the terms of the Consent Agreement necessary to protect the public, to deter the Registrant from similar conduct in his future practice, and to send a clear message of deterrence to the profession.

 

Pages