Complaints Outcomes

Search

Search Results

Search Again
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.

 
Pharmacy Technician Registrant 2 (Mar 23, 2021)

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

  • To comply with any and all treatment plans as recommended by the medical provider(s) and/or most responsible physician(s), including maintaining compliance with medications and maintaining medical appointments;
  • To meet and follow-up with the medical provider(s) and/or the most responsible physician(s) every month for review, counselling, and/or monitoring to ensure the registrant’s continuation of recovery; and
  • To voluntarily stop working as a pharmacy technician registrant and self-report to the College in the event that the pharmacy technician registrant’s medical condition may materially impair or hinder performance and/or fitness to practice as a pharmacy technician.

The Inquiry Committee considers the agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacy technician registrant's name has been withheld pursuant to 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act


September 26, 2020
(March 23, 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 pharmacy technician registrant whereby the registrant consented to terms including, but not limited to, the following:

  • To comply with any and all treatment plans as recommended by the medical provider(s) and/or most responsible physician(s), including maintaining compliance with medications and maintaining medical appointments;
  • Within three months of signing the Consent Agreement, to commence a counselling program with a counsellor and notify the College that the counselling program has commenced;
  • Prior to commencing the counselling program, to meet with the medical physician(s) every two weeks to review and ensure the registrant’s continuation of recovery; and
  • To voluntarily stop working as a pharmacy technician and self-report to the College in the event that the registrant’s medical condition may materially impair or hinder performance and/or fitness to practice as a pharmacy technician registrant.

The Inquiry Committee considers the agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacy technician registrant's name has been withheld pursuant to 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act


April 20, 2020
(September 26, 2020 – Limits and conditions updated)

The Inquiry Committee has reinstated the pharmacy technician registrant’s registration which had previously been suspended for an indefinite period on July 27, 2018. Pursuant to section 36(1) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached an Agreement with the registrant whereby the registrant consented to terms including, but not limited to, the following:

To comply with any and all treatment plans as recommended by the medical provider(s) and/or most responsible physician(s), including maintaining compliance with medications and maintaining medical appointments;

  • To enroll and comply with all terms of a Relapse Prevention Agreement;
  • To commence a counselling program with a counsellor;
  • To have the medical physician(s) provide a report updating the pharmacy technician registrant’s condition and situation to the College; and 
  • To voluntarily stop working as a pharmacy technician and self-report to the College in the event that the registrant’s medical condition may materially impair or hinder performance and/or fitness to practice as a pharmacy technician registrant.

The Inquiry Committee considers the agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacy technician registrant's name has been withheld pursuant to 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act


July 27, 2018
(April 20, 2020 - Suspension ended)

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to Section 32.2 of the Health Professions Act, has reached an agreement with pharmacy technician registrant to suspend her registration as a pharmacy technician for an indefinite period pending further decision of the Inquiry Committee. The Inquiry Committee considers the agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacy technician registrant's name has been withheld pursuant to 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act

Bagry, Pooja (Mar 3, 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 Pooja Bagry (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: March 3, 2021

  3. Name of registrant: Pooja Bagry

  4. Location of Practice: Surrey, BC

  5. Admissions and Acknowledgements:

    The Registrant has admitted and/or acknowledged the following:

    Between August 1, 2015 and July 31, 2017, while she was the pharmacy manager, owner, and director of a pharmacy, multiple practice errors were discovered at the pharmacy. The following were significant contributing factors to these errors:
     
    1. The Registrant did not actively participate in the day-to-day management of the pharmacy during her pregnancies and maternity leaves;

    2. The Registrant was absent from the pharmacy for three months while on maternity leave, but she did not notify the College of this absence;

    3. The Registrant failed to adequately supervise her pharmacy assistant, and failed to implement adequate procedures, checks, and controls to ensure accurate and safe delivery of community pharmacy services by her pharmacy assistant;

    4. The Registrant did not ensure that all patient records, invoices, and documentation were retained in the pharmacy;

    5. The Registrant did not appear to have established adequate procedures for inventory management; and

    6. The Registrant did not ensure that there was an ongoing quality management program at the pharmacy that was sufficiently effective to maintain and enforce policies and procedures to comply with all legislation applicable to the operation of a community pharmacy.

    During the same time period, the Registrant personally made errors during the processing of 18 prescriptions on PharmaNet.
     
  6. 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 have a letter of reprimand placed permanently on the College register;

    2. To not be a pharmacy manager and/or a preceptor for pharmacy students for a period of one year (March 3, 2021 to March 2, 2022);

    3. To pay a fine of $1000.00;

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

    5. To successfully complete and pass the “BC Community Pharmacy Manager Training Program” offered by the British Columbia Pharmacy Association.

  7. Rationale:

    The Inquiry Committee considered it a serious matter that during the relevant time period, the Registrant demonstrated a significant lack of managerial responsibility, which contributed to the occurrence of multiple practice errors and potential patient harm. As the pharmacy manager, the Registrant was responsible for ensuring that pharmacy staff complied with applicable legislation and standards of pharmacy practice at all times.

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

Pharmacist Registrant 27 (Feb 23, 2021)
 

The Inquiry Committee has reinstated pharmacist registrant’s registration which had previously been suspended for an indefinite period on August 27, 2020. Pursuant to Section 32.2(4)(b)(i) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached an Agreement with the pharmacist registrant whereby the pharmacist 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 Registrant's care;

  2. To comply with any and all work plans and gradual return to work protocols as advised by the Registrant’s medical professionals and/or employers;

  3. To strictly adhere to the Registrant's routine medical monitoring program for a total period of 5 years of monitoring;
     
  4. To not order, handle, prepare, dispense or destroy any narcotic, controlled or targeted substances the Registrant may have access to while being medically monitored;
     
  5. To inform the College in via e-mail of the Registrant’s places of employment as a pharmacist 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 Registrant gains employment of the limits and conditions on registration pursuant to the Agreement, if the pharmacy dispenses mood altering drugs;
     
  7. To ensure that all managers and employers with whom the 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 mood altering drugs;

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


August 27, 2020
(February 23, 2021 - Registration Reinstated)

 

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 the registration as a pharmacist effective August 27, 2020. 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 11, 2020
(August 27, 2020 - REGISTRATION Suspended)

 

The Inquiry Committee has reinstated pharmacist registrant’s registration which had previously been suspended for an indefinite period on May 12, 2019. Pursuant to Section 32.2(4)(b)(i) of the Health Professions Act, the Inquiry Committee has reached an Agreement with the pharmacist registrant whereby the pharmacist 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 Registrant's care;
     
  2. To comply with any and all work plans and gradual return to work protocols as advised by the Registrant’s medical professionals and/or employers;
     
  3. To strictly adhere to the Registrant's routine medical monitoring program for the current 3 year period, and then sign an identical agreement for monitoring for an additional 2 years, for a total period of 5 years of monitoring;
     
  4. To not order, handle, prepare, dispense or destroy any narcotic, controlled or targeted substances the Registrant may have access to while being medically monitored;
     
  5. To inform the College in via e-mail of the Registrant’s places of employment as a pharmacist 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 Registrant gains employment of the limits and conditions on registration pursuant to the Agreement, if the pharmacy dispenses mood altering drugs;
     
  7. To ensure that all managers and employers with whom the 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 mood altering drugs.

May 12, 2019
(FEBRUARY 11, 2020 - REGISTRATION REINSTATED)

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 the registration as a pharmacist effective May 12, 2019. 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.


November 7, 2016

The Inquiry Committee has reinstated pharmacist registrant’s registration which had previously been suspended for an indefinite period on June 10, 2016. The pharmacist registrant’s name has been withheld pursuant to section 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act


June 10, 2016
(NOVEMBER 7, 2016 – REGISTRATION REINSTATED)

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to section 36 of the Health Professions Act, has reached an Agreement with the pharmacist registrant to voluntarily suspend the registration as a pharmacist effective June 10, 2016. 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) of the Health Professions Act.

Serjeant, Rina (Jan 7, 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 now former registrant Rina Serjeant (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: January 7, 2021

  3. Name of registrant: Rina Serjeant

  4. Location of Practice: N/A

  5. Admissions and Acknowledgements:

    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 as a pharmacy manager at one of the pharmacies. 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.

  6. The Registrant's Involvement and Acknowledgements:

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

    1. On the PharmaNet record of her colleague, her name was associated with false PharmaNet transactions for vitamins and supplements, as the “prescriber” of these vitamins and supplements. The Former Registrant’s signature was on the prescription hardcopies of these transactions, meaning that she had checked these prescriptions before the hardcopies had been filed away;

    2. The majority of these transactions had been backdated, meaning that the transaction records were created on a date later than the date that appears on PharmaNet. The Former Registrant’s signature appeared on the prescription hardcopies of the backdated transactions, meaning that she knew, or ought to have known, that the transactions had been backdated;

    3. She processed medications on PharmaNet for herself;

    4. She enabled the inappropriate use of personal health information and the creation of inaccurate PharmaNet records, placing her colleague at risk of harm, in case their PharmaNet record ever needed to be accessed for legitimate medical reasons;

    5. She failed to report to the College or to another person of authority regarding the improper practices occurring at the pharmacy, even though she knew that these practices were improper; and

    6. As pharmacy manager, she enabled the false transactions on patient PharmaNet records, did not set or enforce policies and procedures at the pharmacy to ensure compliance with practice standards, and did not actively participate in the day-to-day management of the pharmacy.

  7. Disposition

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

    1. To pay a $3000.00 fine;
       
    2. To have a letter of reprimand placed permanently on the College register;
       
    3. If she reinstates her registration to Full Pharmacist status, upon reinstatement:
       
      1. To successfully complete and pass an ethics course for healthcare professionals within two years. If she fails to complete this within the specified time period, her registration will be suspended for a period of 60 days;
         
      2. To appear before the Inquiry Committee for a verbal reprimand;
         
      3. To not be a pharmacy manager and/or a preceptor for pharmacy students for a period of 2 years;
         
      4. To successfully pass the College’s Jurisprudence Exam; and
         
      5. To successfully complete and pass the “BC Community Pharmacy Manager Training Program” offered by the British Columbia Pharmacy Association.
         
  8. Rationale:

    The Former 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 her role as a pharmacy manager. Her misconduct placed others at risk of harm. The Former 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 Former Registrant, the Inquiry Committee considered the Former Registrant’s report of feeling pressured by her employer (the pharmacy owner) to commit these actions, and that she 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.

Drenic-Stojanovic, Drena (Dec 30, 2020)

Nature of Action: Pursuant to section 35(1)(a) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”), effective December 30, 2020, the Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (the “College”) has made an order to impose limits and conditions on the pharmacy practice of the registrant Drena Drenic-Stojanovic (the “Registrant”) during the investigation into the Registrant’s practice, as follows:

  1. The Registrant shall not be involved in any way in the preparation, compounding, manipulation and/or dispensing of injectable and/or sterile products to patients/clients or health care providers/prescribers for office use;
  2. The Registrant shall not act as a pharmacy manager or owner;
  3. The Registrant shall not act as a preceptor to students or be responsible for the supervision of other staff and/or registrants;
  4. The Registrant must work under the direct supervision of another registrant acceptable to College staff; and
  5. The Registrant must inform any employer of these limits and conditions of her practice and provide it with a copy of this decision.

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

Reasons: While practising as a pharmacist, it is alleged that the Registrant did not comply with the applicable legislation and standards of practice required to compound sterile preparations. While practising as a pharmacist, it is alleged that the Registrant distributed compounded sterile preparations from an unlicensed pharmacy.

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.

Pharmacist Registrant 45 (Dec 23, 2020)

The Inquiry Committee has reinstated pharmacist registrant’s registration, which had previously been suspended for an indefinite period on October 20, 2020. The pharmacist registrant’s name has been withheld pursuant to section 39.3(4) of the Health Professions Act


October 20, 2020
(December 23, 2020 - Registration Reinstated)

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 October 20, 2020. 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.

Amara, Alaa Mohssen (Dec 18, 2020)
  1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (“CPBC”) conducted an investigation into the practice of Alaa Mohssen Amara (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 July 6, 2020, which was subsequently amended on November 23, 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: December 18, 2020

  3. Name of registrant: Alaa Mohssen Amara

  4. Location of Practice: Powell River, BC

  5. Admissions and Acknowledgements: The Registrant has admitted and/or acknowledged the following (in part):

    1. In or about February 2018, the Registrant allowed a pharmacy opioid agonist treatment (“OAT”) patient to deliver methadone to a medical clinic for administration to another pharmacy OAT patient.

    2. The Registrant failed to ensure the security of methadone by allowing it to be delivered to a medical clinic without taking sufficient precautions to ensure a secure chain of custody.

    3. The Registrant misled a College investigator and the Inquiry Committee during the investigation by not providing accurate and truthful information regarding non-pharmacist methadone delivery.

    4. Between December 2017 and February 2018, on multiple occasions, the Registrant dispensed a patient’s methadone contrary to the prescription in terms of quantity dispensed.

    5. The Registrant caused or allowed multiple methadone maintenance treatment (“MMT”) prescriptions for an OAT patient to be dispensed contrary to the legislation and practice standards.

    6. The Registrant failed to ensure that the required documentation was completed and/or retained for an OAT patient, including documentation for deliveries completed, physician notifications for missed doses, and part-fill accountability logs.

    7. From about July 1, 2017 until March 27, 2018, on multiple occasions, the Registrant backdated methadone prescriptions and failed to review the patient’s personal health information on PharmaNet prior to dispensing MMT.

    8. During a college pharmacy inspection:

      1. The Registrant was only able to produce one narcotic reconciliation. The Registrant failed to ensure that adequate narcotic counts and reconciliations were completed for the pharmacy.

      2. Schedule I, II, and III drugs and controlled drug substances were unsecured. The Registrant failed to ensure appropriate security and storage of all Schedule I, II, and III drugs and controlled substances.

    9. The Registrant failed to reverse information in the PharmaNet database for several drugs not released to a patient or the patient’s representative, and the Registrant failed to record the reason for the reversal no later than 30 days from the date of the original entry of the prescription information in PharmaNet.

    10. The Registrant was engaged in a conflict of interest and unethical behaviour by allowing OAT patients to work in the pharmacy.

    11. The Registrant breached his undertakings made to the Inquiry Committee on July 17, 2012 and February 11, 2015.

  6. Disposition:

    In the Consent Order under section 37.1 of the HPA, the Inquiry Committee ordered that the Registrant (in part):

    1. Pursuant to section 39(2) of the HPA, the Registrant’s registration with the CPBC is suspended for a period of 90 days commencing April 1, 2021 to June 29, 2021;

    2. Will not be a manager for a period of 90 days commencing on the date his suspension ends (June 30, 2021 to September 27, 2021);

    3. Successfully complete and pass the CPEP PROBE “Ethics and Boundaries Program”. After the successful completion of the program, to meet with the Inquiry Committee to reflect on his conduct and what he has learned from the program;

    4. Consent to a letter of reprimand; 

    5. Will not be a preceptor of pharmacy students and/or international pharmacy graduates for a period of five (5) years commencing on December 16, 2020 to December 15, 2025; and

    6. Pay a fine of $5000 to the CPBC.

  7. Rationale:

    The Registrant contravened sections of the HPA, Pharmacy Operations and Drug Scheduling Act (“PODSA”) Bylaws, HPA Bylaws, and the Code of Ethics in his practice as a pharmacist, pharmacy manager, owner and director, and thereby, neglected his basic duties as a pharmacist, and committed or allowed actions that were unethical and could potentially endanger patient health. The totality of his conduct demonstrated a breach of trust and undermines the integrity of the profession.

    The Registrant’s conduct in this instance, coupled with the breach of his previous undertakings, is considered professional misconduct and justifies serious consequences. The Inquiry Committee considered it appropriate 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 does not tolerate this type of conduct under any circumstances.

Pages