English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Community pharmacists are cited and/or fined at an alarming rate. Pharmacists can also be charged by the California (CA) Attorney General (AG) or the Board of Pharmacy (BOP) for more severe violations of law and/or professional practice standards, in the form of an Accusation, the administrative equivalent of a civil “complaint.” This article presents a concise review of two pharmacy practice scenarios involving adjudication of refills with implications for practice violations and attempts to clarify best practices in order to meet the expectations of the BOP and avoid problems with a BOP inspection. The scenarios discussed here cover: 1) Use of “as needed” (prn) wording in a prescription (whether in the directions for use or refill context); and 2) Refills of routine and controlled substance prescriptions called in by a pharmacy technician or pharmacy clerk. The authors' identification of best practices in these refill contexts aims to enhance pharmacists' understanding of pharmacy law in order to ensure maximum compliance.

Avoiding Common Legal Issues Confronted in Pharmacy Practice: Evaluating Prescriptions with PRN Wording and Calling for Refills