OHIO STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY; 77 S. HIGH STREET, ROOM 1702; COLUMBUS, OHIO 43215-6126

Tel: 614/466-4143          Fax: 614/752-4836           Email: exec@bop.state.oh.us           Web: www.pharmacy.ohio.gov

 

 

OHIO STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY NEWS

~~ FEBRUARY 2005 ~~

 

 

The Ohio State Board of Pharmacy News is published by the Ohio State Board of Pharmacy and the National Association of Boards of Pharmacy Foundation, Inc. to promote voluntary compliance of pharmacy and drug law.  The opinions and views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the official views, opinions, or policies of the Foundation or the Board unless expressly so stated.

William T. Winsley, MS, RPh - State News Editor

Carmen A. Catizone, MS, RPh, DPh - National News Editor & Executive Editor

Reneeta C. "Rene" Renganathan - Editorial Manager

 

 

State News Section

 

Ohio Jurisprudence CPE Quiz Inside

 

     On pages 4 and 5 [for the Web copy it follows at the end] of this Newsletter is the quiz that covers the May 2004, August 2004, November 2004, and February 2005 issues of the Ohio State Board of Pharmacy Newsletter for Board approved jurisprudence continuing pharmacy education credit.  Be sure to note that no credit will be granted for Answer Sheets postmarked after March 31, 2005.

 

New Rules in Effect

 

     By the time this Newsletter is received, the Board will have implemented changes to Ohio’s Admini­stra­tive Code.  A listing of the new rules, showing changes, can be found on the Board’s Web site, www.pharmacy.ohio.gov, by clicking on the “What’s New” box.  While most of the changes will not be covered in the Newsletter due to space constraints, please remember that it is still your responsibility to be familiar with the current laws, rules, and regulations relating to drugs.  Please review these changes at your earliest convenience.  The most current source for Board rules is still the Board’s Web site.  On the home page, click on the “Laws & Rules” box then click on “Administrative Code Rules” to see a listing of all of the Board’s rules.  The Web site is updated each time a rule is changed as indicated by the rule’s stated effective date.

4729-5-21 – Manner of processing a prescription

4729-5-30 – Manner of issuance of a prescription

     Rule 4729-5-30 was completely rewritten this year.  This has always been one of the most important rules for pharmacists and prescribers to know because it described the requirements for issuing and fill­ing a prescription.  Over the years, this rule had become fairly long and unwieldy, so it has been divided into two rules, 4729-5-21 and the new 4729-5-30. 4729-5-21 is a new rule that describes the process to be followed by pharmacists when filling a prescription.  Rule 4729-5-30 has been rewritten to become the rule that de­scribes the process to be used by prescribers when issuing a prescription.  It is important to note that both rules contain identical language about the corresponding responsibility of both the prescriber and the phar­macist regarding the need for a prescription to be issued for a legitimate medical purpose by an individual prescriber acting in the usual course of his/her professional practice.  The term “corresponding” as used in these rules is defined as “equal” when the individual health care practitioner is acting on what he/she knows or should know.  For example, a physician who has been notified by a pharmacy that his/her patient is receiving prescriptions for the same controlled substance from five dif­ferent doctors should take appropriate action to remedy the situation.  Such action may in­clude some­thing as drastic as the dismissal of the patient from the prescriber’s practice.  If, on the other hand, the physician takes no action but continues to pre­scribe as before, then questions about the legiti­macy of the pre­scrip­tions must be raised.  In addition, if the pharmacist continues to blindly fill the pre­scriptions, even though it is obvious that there is a problem, then he/she is as liable for providing the medi­ca­tions to the patient as is the prescriber.  In other words, they both have a corresponding respon­sibility to ensure that the patient does not receive more medication than would be appropriate for the patient’s legitimate medical condition.  Each patient’s situation is different and requires good judgment on the part of both the prescriber and the pharmacist, but these rules make it clear that the pharmacist may not hide behind the excuse, “The doctor wrote it, so I have to fill it.”

4729-5-13 – Prescription Format

     The format of prescriptions has been the subject of joint discussions between the medical board and the Board of Pharmacy for some time. You may remember that Rule 4729-5-30 was revised last year to require the printed or typewritten name and telephone number of the prescriber to be on all written pre­scriptions.  You should also remember that several years ago, this rule (4729-5-13) was revised to limit controlled sub­stances to one prescription per blank, but the number of handwritten noncontrolled sub­stances that could be on a prescription form was not addressed.  This year, the Medical Board and the Board of Pharmacy agreed that some limit needed to be placed on the number of noncontrolled sub­stances that were placed on each prescription form.  We have had examples of prescribers putting twenty-five (25) prescriptions on one standard sized pre­scrip­tion blank.  That is definitely a patient safety hazard.  As a result of the discussions between the Boards, a maximum of three (3) noncontrolled substances will be allowed to appear on a single handwritten or typewritten prescription form.  As dis­cussed in previous years, phar­ma­cists need to use some judgment when presented with prescriptions containing more than three orders on a blank.  There will need to be a time frame for education of the prescribers.  Please do not put the patient in the middle of this process.  Pharmacists should first try to educate the prescriber on the rule change.  If the prescriber refuses to comply and continues to knowingly violate the rule, pharmacists should provide several copies of the offending prescriptions to the Board of Pharmacy for follow-up action by either the Medical Board or the Board of Pharmacy.  Please try to educate first.

 

Disciplinary Actions

 

     Anyone having a question regarding the license status of a particular practitioner, nurse, phar­macist, phar­macy intern, or dangerous drug distributor in Ohio should contact the appropriate licensing board.

State Dental Board – 614/466-2580, www.dental.ohio.gov

State Medical Board – 614/466-3934, www.med.ohio.gov

State Nursing Board – 614/466-3947, www.nursing.ohio.gov

State Optometry Board – 614/466-5115, www.optometry.ohio.gov

State Pharmacy Board – 614/466-4143, www.pharmacy.ohio.gov

State Veterinary Medical Board – 614/644-5281, www.ovmlb.ohio.gov

Drug Enforcement Administration – 800/230-6844; www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov

 

State Pharmacy Board

    The disciplinary actions listed below include only those where the individual’s license to practice has been suspended, revoked, or restricted, and do not include any other actions taken by the Board.  All actions may be seen in the minutes, which are posted on the Board’s Web site under “Board Minutes.”

Orders of the Board:

Morganna E. Allen, RPh; Columbus – License suspended effective November 10, 2004, until December 1, 2004, and may not be employed by or work in a facility licensed by the Board while suspended. Effective December 1, 2004, may not dispense prescriptions for herself, may not serve as a preceptor or train pharmacy interns, and may not serve as a responsible phar­macist for two years.

Scott David Beach, RPh; Bluffton – License suspended indefinitely, minimum two years, effec­tive Novem­ber 10, 2004, and may not be employed by or work in a facility licensed by the Board while suspended.

John David Campbell, RPh; Nashport – License suspended indefinitely, minimum five years, effec­tive October 6, 2004, and may not be employed by or work in a facility licensed by the Board while sus­pended.

James Scott Crider, RPh; West Aliquippa, PA – May not serve as a preceptor or train pharmacy interns and may not serve as a responsible pharmacist for one year effective December 9, 2004.

Todd C. LaTour, RPh; Cincinnati – License revoked permanently October 6, 2004.

Jason Matthew Reip; Westlake – Denied application for admission to the licensure exami­na­tion effec­tive October 6, 2004, and may not reapply prior to October 6, 2014; May not be employed by or work in a facility licensed by the Board during this 10- year period and, after this period, must receive prior approval from the Board.

Thomas Alan Scott, RPh; Portsmouth – License reinstated November 9, 2004; May not serve as a preceptor or train pharmacy interns, may not serve as a responsible pharmacist, and may not destroy, assist in, or witness the destruction of controlled substances for five years effective October 6, 2004.

James W. Smetana, RPh; Russells Point – License reinstated December 17, 2004; May not serve as a pre­ceptor or train pharmacy interns, may not serve as a responsible pharmacist, and may not destroy, assist in, or witness the destruction of controlled substances for five years effective December 9, 2004.

David Ray Spence, RPh; Circleville – License suspended six months effective December 9, 2004, and may not be employed by or work in a facility licensed by the Board while sus­pended.  Effective upon reinstatement of his iden­tification card to practice, may not serve as a pre­cep­tor or train phar­macy interns, may not serve as a responsible phar­macist, and may not destroy, assist in, or witness the destruction of controlled substances for five years.

John Paul Tekulve, RPh; Cincinnati – License suspended six months effective November 10, 2004, and may not be employed by or work in a facility licensed by the Board while sus­pended.  Effective upon reinstatement of his iden­tification card to practice, may not serve as a pre­cep­tor or train phar­macy interns, may not serve as a responsible phar­macist, and may not destroy, assist in, or witness the destruction of controlled substances for five years.

Settlement Agreements:

Dwayne Steven Varner, RPh; Johnstown, PA – May not practice in Ohio without prior approval of the Ohio Board effective January 3, 2005.

Summary Suspensions:  [Sec. 3719.121 of the Ohio Revised Code]

Kevin James Bowers, RPh; Fairfield. Effective October 20, 2004.

 

 

 

National News Section

 

Applicability of the contents of articles in the National Pharmacy Compliance News to a particular state or juris­diction should not be assumed and can only be ascertained by examining the law of such state or jurisdiction.

 

The Effects of the Flu Vaccine Shortage

 

     In early October 2004, Chiron Corporation, one of two major pharmaceutical manufacturers of influ­enza vaccine, informed the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that it would be unable to distribute its estimated 48 million doses of Fluvirinin® time for the 2004-05 flu season.  The United Kingdom’s Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency temporarily sus­pended Chiron’s license for its Liverpool facility that was scheduled to produce Fluvirin for dis­tri­bu­tion throughout the United States.

     During the 2003-04 flu season, approximately 87 million doses of influenza vaccine were admini­stered. Before Chiron’s announcement, it was expected that 100 million doses would be available during this season, with Aventis, the other major influenza vaccine (Fluzone®) producer, contributing 54 mil­lion doses.  Aventis has indicated that it will be able to produce an additional 2.6 million doses of influ­enza vaccine by January 2005.

     Shortly after this announcement CDC convened its Advisory Committee on Immunization Prac­tices to issue recommendations to prioritize the existing supply of influenza vaccine.  In summary, the CDC recom­mends that the following priority groups be given available doses first due to their increased risk of com­pli­cations from influenza infection:

®  Persons aged 65 years or older;

®  Children six to 23 months of age;

®  Residents of long-term care facilities and nursing homes;

®  Persons two to 64 years of age with chronic medical conditions;

®  Health care workers involved in direct patient care;

®  Household contacts and out-of-home caregivers of children less than six months of age;

®  Children and teenagers between the ages of six months and 18 years who are receiving aspirin therapy; and

®  Pregnant women.

     Although not appropriate for everyone, FluMist® (MedImmune), the intranasal influenza vac­cine, may be a good alternative for healthy persons between the ages of five and 49.  Unlike Fluvirin and Fluzone inject­ables, which are inactivated influenza vaccines, FluMist is a live attenu­ated virus, which, if administered to at-risk groups, particularly those with compromised immune systems, may in rare instances actually cause disease.

     Other alternatives include antiviral medications, which may be used to prevent and treat influenza infec­tion.  The antiviral agents rimantadine, Tamiflu® (oseltamivir), and amantadine are Food and Drug Admini­stration (FDA) approved for treatment and prophylaxis of influenza.  Relenza® (zanamivir) is only approved for influenza treatment.  To help minimize resistance, CDC currently encourages the use of amantadine or rimantadine for influenza prevention while using the other antivirals oseltamivir or zanamivir for treatment.

     Although vaccination and other pharmacologic interventions are extremely beneficial, health care profes­sionals should educate patients on practical measures that can be taken to prevent the spread of influenza. These include:

®  Washing your hands frequently to avoid the spread of viruses and bacteria;

®  Avoiding contact with people who may be sick;

®  Cleaning telephones, door knobs, and other environmental surfaces with disinfecting agents to help prevent the spread of viruses and bacteria;

®  Covering your mouth and nose when coughing or sneezing;

®  Staying home from work and/or school when you are sick and limiting/eliminating contact with those who have compromised immune systems.

     In late August 2004, US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Tommy G. Thompson released preliminary plans for a National Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Plan that details a national strategy to prepare for and respond to an influenza pandemic and provides action steps that should be taken at the national, state, and local levels during a pandemic.  At press time, the draft plan was located at www.hhs.gov/nvpo/pandemicplan.  Pharmacists have become increasingly active in efforts to increase the public access to immunizations; according to National Association of Board's of Pharmacy® (NABP®) 2003-2004 Survey of Pharmacy Law, more than half of the states allow pharmacists to admini­ster immunizations.

     Because of the influenza vaccine shortage, many have expressed concerns about the possibility of counterfeit influenza vaccines.  Pharmacies and health care institutions should only secure pro­duct from reputable resources and immediately report any suspect product.  Also, many phar­ma­cies have reported that the price of influenza injectable vaccines from some distributors has more than doubled since the shortage.  In mid-October 2004, HHS Secretary Thompson urged the state attorneys general to prosecute those who were price gouging the cost of influenza vaccines.

For more information visit these Web sites:

FDA Flu Information – www.fda.gov/oc/opacom/hottopics/flu.html.

CDC Influenza Information (including vaccination information and Antiviral Medication Usage Guidelines) – www.cdc.gov/flu.

 

FDA Urges Consumer Education About Counterfeit Drugs

 

     In an interim report, FDA’s Anti-Counterfeiting Task Force stressed the importance of increasing aware­ness and education of stakeholders including the public concerning counterfeit drugs.  The report called for increasing efforts of FDA and other government agencies to educate consumers and health care profession­als on how to reduce the risk of obtaining counterfeit drugs before the event occurs; educating consumers and health care professionals on how to identify counterfeit drugs; and improving and coordinating FDA and industry messages and efforts to address and contain a counterfeit event.  At press time, FDA had available on its Web site (www.fda.gov/cder/consumerinfo/counterfeit_all_resources.htm) public service announce­ments that can be printed for consumers as well as educational articles to inform the public.

     One recent high-profile case concerned Viagra® (sildenafil citrate) that was dispensed from two pharma­cies located in California.  The counterfeit product closely resembled genuine Viagra tablets with respect to size, shape, color, and imprinting; however, the counterfeit drugs had subtle dif­fer­ences in tablet edging, film coating, imprinting font, and pack­aging.  At press time, FDA, along with Pfizer, Inc, the legitimate manu­facturer of Viagra, was analyzing the counterfeit product to de­ter­mine its true com­position and whether or not it posed any health risks; fortunately, no injur­ies had been reported.  For comparative photos of the counterfeit drug and genuine Viagra, refer to Pfizer’s “Dear Pharmacist” letter posted on the company’s Web site at www.pfizer.com as well as FDA’s distributed a press release that is now available at www.fda.gov.

     Exactly one month after the counterfeit Viagra product was discovered, FDA expressed concern regard­ing counter­feit versions of the prescription drugs Zocor® (simvastatin) and carisoprodol, which were im­ported from Mexico by US citizens.  Tests of these products revealed that the coun­terfeit Zocor, reportedly purchased at Mexican border-town pharmacies and sold under the name Zocor 40/mg (lot number K9784, expiration date November 2004, and lot number K9901, ex­piration date December 2006), did not contain any active ingredient.  Likewise, the counterfeit carisoprodol 350/mg (lot number 68348A) test results indicated that the products differed sig­ni­ficantly in potency when compared to the authentic product.  FDA continues to investigate this matter and is working with Mexican authorities to ensure that further sale and importation of these products are halted.  For more information on counter­feit Zocor, visit www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/2004/ANS01303.html.

 

Diabetes or Alzheimer's Disease?

 

This column was prepared by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP). ISMP is an indepen­dent nonprofit agency that works closely with United States Pharmacopeia (USP) and FDA in analyzing medication errors, near misses, and potentially hazardous conditions as reported by pharmacists and other practitioners. ISMP then makes appropriate contacts with companies and regulators, gathers expert opinion about prevention measures, then publishes its recommendations. If you would like to report a problem confidentially to these organizations, go to the ISMP Web site (www.ismp.org) for links with USP, ISMP, and FDA. Or call 1-800/23-ERROR to report directly to the USP-ISMP Medi­cation Errors Reporting Program. ISMP address: 1800 Byberry Rd, Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006. Phone: 215/947-7797. E-mail: ismpinfo@ismp.org.

 

     Several reports of mix-ups have been reported in which the antidiabetic agent AMARYL® (glimepiride) had been dispensed to geriatric patients instead of the Alzheimer’s Disease medication REMINYL® (galanta­mine).  Each drug is available in a 4 mg tablet, although other tablet strengths are also available for each.  In one case, a 78-year-old woman with a history of Alzheimer’s disease was admitted to the hospital with hypoglycemia (blood glucose on admission 27 mg/dL).  A review of the medications she was taking at home revealed that her pharmacist dispensed Amaryl 4 mg, which she took twice daily instead of Reminyl 4 mg BID.  In another case, an 89-year-old female received Amaryl instead of Reminyl for three days, eventually requiring hospitalization for treatment of severe hypo­glycemia.  A third patient received Amaryl instead of Reminyl while in the hospital, leading to severe hypoglycemia.  All patients recovered with treatment.  These events have been linked to poor prescriber handwriting and sound-alike, look-alike names.  It is possible that prescriptions for Amaryl are more commonly encountered than those for Reminyl.  Thus, confirmation bias (seeing that which is most familiar, while overlooking any disconfirming evidence) may lead pharmacists or nurses into “auto­matically” believing a Reminyl prescription is for Amaryl.

     Obviously, accidental administration of Amaryl poses great danger to any patient, especially an older patient, who may be more sensitive to its hypoglycemic effects.  Practitioners should be alerted to the potential for confusion between Amaryl and Reminyl.  Prescribers should be reminded to indicate the medi­ca­tion’s purpose on prescriptions.  Consider building alerts about potential confusion into computer order entry systems and/or adding reminder labels to pharmacy containers.  Patients (or caregivers) should be educated about all of their medications so they are familiar with each product’s name, purpose, and expected appear­ance.  Most importantly, at all times pharmacists and nurses should confirm that patients are diabetic before dispensing or administering any antidiabetic medication, including Amaryl. FDA, Aventis (Amaryl), and Janssen Pharmaceutica Products LP (Reminyl) are aware of these reports and will be taking action to help reduce the potential for errors.

 

Medication Safety Videos Available Free

 

     FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health has been producing a monthly series of patient safety videos available via the Internet. ISMP and FDA’s Division of Medication Errors and Technical Support, Office of Drug Safety, has been cooperating in this effort.  Access www.ismp.org/Pages/ FDAVideos.htm for videos related to medication errors.  See www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/psn/viewbroadcasts.cfm for a complete list of all broadcasts.

 

2005 Survey of Pharmacy Law Now Available

 

     NABP’s 2005 Survey of Pharmacy Law CD-ROM is now available.  Eight new questions were added to this year’s Survey; topics include the formatting requirements of prescription pads, laws/­regulations on the dis­posal of medications, and whether or not pharmacists are allowed to dispense emergency con­traception without a prescription.  The Survey can be obtained for $20 from NABP by downloading the publication order form from www.nabp.net and mailing in the form and a check or money order to NABP.  The CD-ROM is pro­vided free of charge to all final-year pharmacy students through a grant from GlaxoSmithKline.  If you do not have Web access or would like more information on the Survey, please contact NABP at 847/391-4406 or via e-mail at custserv@nabp.net.

 

NABP Headquarters Moves to New Location

 

     NABP has moved its Headquarters to 1600 Feehanville Drive, Mount Prospect, IL 60056.  The new phone number is 847/391-4406 and the new fax number is 847/391-4502.  All printed communications can be sent to the Feehanville Drive address.  If you have any questions con­cerning the Association’s new Headquarters, please contact the Customer Service Department at custserv@nabp.net or call 847/391-4406.

 

Register Now for NABP’s 101st Annual Meeting

 

     Register now for NABP’s 101st Annual Meeting, May 21-24, 2005, at the Sheraton New Orleans Hotel, New Orleans, LA, so you can take advantage of the chance to earn up to five hours of con­tinuing education (CE).

     This year, CE sessions will focus on topics that fall under the Meeting’s theme, “A Medley for Patient Safety: Accreditation, Self Assessment, Quality Care.”  Other events include the Educational Presentation Area and Poster Session, the President’s Welcome Reception, NABP’s annual business sessions, and the Annual Awards Dinner.  In addition, you and your spouse or guest will have the opportunity to participate in a special recreational tour and the annual Fun Run/Walk.

     For more information visit NABP’s Web site at www.nabp.net, or contact NABP at 847/391-4406 or custserv@nabp.net.

 

=\=\==/=/=

 

 

 

2005 S.B.N. JURISPRUDENCE QUIZ

(covering May 2004, August 2004, November 2004, and

February 2005 issues of the State Board Newsletter)

 

ANSWER SHEET FOLLOWS

No credit can be granted for Answer Sheets postmarked after March 31, 2005.

 

 

1.   If you have submitted a continuing pharmacy education pro­gram for grading, but have not received the certifi­cate, it is still appropriate to list this program on your reporting form.

A.   True          B.   False

 

2.   Continuing pharmacy education forms must be submitted to the Board office by May 15th of the year a pharmacist is required to report.

A.   True          B.   False

 

3.   According to the Health Insurance Portability and Account­ability Act (HIPAA), which of the following are true?

A.   A pharmacist does not have a legal right to patient information when dispensing a prescription

B.   A pharmacist does have a legal right to patient in­formation when dispensing a prescription

C.   A pharmacist has a legal right to patient information when dispensing a prescription only if a patient waiver is obtained

D.   When dispensing a prescription, the pharmacist be­comes a treatment provider and has a legal right to the patient information

E.   B and D

 

4.   Under the FDA's OTC Product Labeling regulation, a warn­ing is required that patients with restricted diets should con­sult their physician before using oral pro­ducts that contain:

A.   More than 140 mg sodium

B.   More than 3.2 grams calcium

C.   More than 600 mg magnesium

D.   More than 975 mg potassium

E.   All of the above

 

5.   Which of the following phases are included in the American Society of Health-system Pharmacists guidelines to assist a pharmacist in addressing drug supply shortages?

A.   Assessment phase

B.   Preparation phase

C.   Contingency phase

D.   All of the above

 

6.   On April 6, 2004, FDA's rule banning the sale of ephedra-containing products took effect.

A.   True          B.   False

 

7.   Both the Board of Pharmacy and the DEA require that for a prescription to be valid it must be issued for a legitimate medical purpose by a prescriber acting in the usual course of professional practice and that a pharmacist fill­ing that prescription has a "correspond­ing responsibility" with the prescriber to assure the validity of the prescrip­tion.

A.   True          B.   False

 

8.   According to the DEA regulation addressing the sale of pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine, what is the maximum threshold for a single transaction to an indivi­dual without being registered as a List I distribu­tor with the DEA?

A.   3 grams

B.   5 grams

C.   6 grams

D.   9 grams

E.   10 grams

 

9.   Tragic overdoses have occurred when dispensing concentrated morphine due to confusion in the product labeling versus the prescriber's directions for use.

A.  True          B.  False

 

10.   In March 2004, the FDA issued a public health advisory.  The FDA is requesting that manufacturers change the labels of cer­tain drugs to include stronger cautions and warnings to monitor patients for worsening depression and the emergence of suicidal ideation.  Which of the following drugs fall under this request?

A.  Zoloft

B.  Paxil

C.  Lexapro

D.  Welbutrin

E.  All of the above

 

11.  Under the FDA's new rules, oral OTC medications must state the exact amount of a particular ingredient in each dose if it contains:

A.  5 mg or more of sodium in a single dose

B.  20 mg or more of calcium in a single dose

C.  8 mg or more of magnesium in a single dose

D.  5 mg or more of potassium in a single dose

E.  All of the above

 

12.  Ohio Administrative Code Rule 4729-9-15 requires a pharmacist to immediately report the theft or loss to the Pharmacy Board for which of the following?

A.  Controlled substances

B.  Non-controlled dangerous drugs

C.  Both A and B

 

13.  Starting in the Spring of 2005, the competency state­ments for the NAPLEX examination will include the utilization of dietary supple­ments.

A.  True          B.  False

 

14.  The FDA rule addressing Bar Code Label Requirements for Blood and Blood Products used in transfusion must include which of the following?

A.  Facility identifier

B.  Lot number relating to the donor

C.  Product code

D.  Information on the donor blood type

E.  All of the above

 

15.  Factors that should cause a pharmacist to consider whether or not prescriptions are issued for a legitimate medical purpose include which of the following?

A.  The patient lives a long distance from the pharmacy

B.  The prescriber is located a long distance from the pharmacy

C.  The prescriber has written for unusual combinations of con­trolled substances

D.  The prescriber writes the same pain medications and dosages for every patient

E.  All of the above

 

16.  The maximum number of non-controlled prescriptions that may be handwritten on the prescription form is:

A.  One

B.  Three

C.  Five

D.  Ten

E.  There is no limit

[End of Questions]

 

-  A N S W E R  S H E E T  -

 

State Board Newsletter (February 2005) Jurisprudence Quiz

 

JURISPRUDENCE REQUIREMENT FOR CPE

To receive a certificate of credit, complete this form and mail it to the

address below with a check for $3.75 payable to Justice Data Management.

A certificate will be mailed to those receiving a passing score of 75 or better.

 

 

PLEASE FILL IN YOUR ANSWER TO EACH QUESTION

 

 

A

B

C

D

E

 

 

A

B

C

D

E

1.

O

O

 

 

 

 

9.

O

O

 

 

 

2.

O

O

 

 

 

 

10.

O

O

O

O

O

3.

O

O

O

O

O

 

11.

O

O

O

O

O

4.

O

O

O

O

O

 

12.

O

O

O

 

 

5.

O

O

O

O

 

 

13.

O

O

 

 

 

6.

O

O

 

 

 

 

14.

O

O

O

O

O

7.

O

O

 

 

 

 

15.

O

O

O

O

O

8.

O

O

O

O

O

 

16.

O

O

O

O

O

 

JURISPRUDENCE CPE; JUSTICE DATA MANAGEMENT; P. O. BOX 43056; CINCINNATI, OH 45243-0056

(513/794-1642)

 

No CPE credit can be granted for Answer Sheets postmarked after March 31, 2005.

 

 

NAME:  [Please Print Or Type]

 

OHIO PHARMACIST I.D. NUMBER:

 

ADDRESS:

 

DAYTIME TELEPHONE NUMBER:

CITY:

 

STATE:

ZIP CODE:

 

 

Program Evaluation

 

Please rate this program in the following areas:

(check one box for each area)

 

  [1=Poor / 2=Fair / 3=Satisfactory / 4=Good / 5=Excellent]

1

2

3

4

5

 

®   Quality of information

£

£

£

£

£

 

®   Usefulness to my practice

£

£

£

£

£

 

®   Readability and presentation

£

£

£

£

£