Increased responsibility
November 25, 2011
A US Supreme Court has ruled
that pharmacists may, in some
instances, be held accountable for
adverse drug reactions.
According to reports, the Nevada
Supreme Court found that whilst
pharmacists “have no duty to warn
their customers of the generalised
risk inherent in the prescriptions
they fill, [this] does not foreclose a
pharmacist’s potential for liability
when the pharmacist has knowledge
of a customer-specific risk”.
The ruling was the result of a case
against a pharmacist who dispensed
Bactrim, a sulfa based antibiotic,
for a urinary tract infection to a
patient with a sulphur allergy.
According to reports, the
pharmacist contacted the patient
about the potential risk before
dispensing the medication, but
was assured by the patient that
they had taken sulphur before and
had no reaction.
As such, the pharmacist dispensed
the drug and the patient later died
from the reaction.
In the ruling, Supreme Court
Justice Ron Parraguirre said that
pharmacists have a duty to inform
patients and prescribers of specific
risks a drug might carry, and
overturned an initial court win by
the defendant pharmacy, returning
the case to a district court to
“develop more facts”.
The above article was sent to subscribers in Pharmacy Daily's issue from 25 Nov 11To see the full newsletter, see the embedded issue below or CLICK HERE to download Pharmacy Daily from 25 Nov 11
