Inpatient pharmacists :How much liability of a pharmacist vs supervising tech?

[UGAZ]

State Board came down to visit my place last week. Before they came in, I already warned all of my working technicians to get ready and be very alerted. Anyway, they caught the IV tech not wearing mask, shoe covers, and head cover. My director also arrived late , like half an hour after their presence.

A warning report was issued after from the state board with a plan of action required. After they left, my director got so mad and we had a staff meeting addressing these issues. He basically sorted of blaming on me, who was the pharmacist working that morning not supervising the techs. I got very upset over this because my hands were tied with orders pouring down from floors. Also, I already warned the technicians to be alerted.

Am I held liable for all of these noncompliance from the IV technician? I am just wondering.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[awval999]

Am I held liable for all of these noncompliance from the IV technician? I am just wondering.

The PIC of the inpatient pharmacy is legally responsible. This is usually (not always) the Director. But could be the Pharmacy Manager depending on how large of a facility.

Now, while you may not be legally responsible, you could be subject to discipline at your job because your role is, of course, to be supervising the operational process as a pharmacist.

 

[Saiyo]

Sounds like the director never regularly enforced these rules with the technicians and now is shifting blame since y'all got burned. Classic management.

 

[Dred Pirate]

like was stated earlier - the PIC (director) is legally responsible - how they delegate those responsibilities is up to them, remember **** flows downhill - right to you in this situation. They can get mad and pissed and discipline how they see fit (you can argue how effective that management style is). But seriously - do the techs not know how to garb? If you did that is our hospital you would have an instant write up- a second time, and you would be fired, that is basic common sense (not to mention patient safety).

This will vary based on the geographic layout of the pharmacy - but there is zero way in our setup a tech could do that without a pharmacist seeing it.

 

[Pharmgrlnxdor]

Whenever I have been involved in an audit, I was there early, totally prepared, with all my i's dotted and t's crossed, because of the possibility of something bad happening otherwise. Seems kind of crazy that your supervisor arrived after the auditors.

 

[lord999]

Depends on the state. If you're AZ, that's the PIC to enforce policy, although it is the pharmacists on duty collectively who are responsible for the safe conduct of anything dispensed meaning that if the tech's didn't wash their hands and contaminated a sterile product and you verified it, it's your problem even if the PIC had a policy to wash hands and is responsible for enforcement. In MN, it's actually both the PIC and the pharmacist(s) on duty which is why formal scheduling is needed for coverage assignments, but the PIC has ultimate responsibility.

Most state audits should be unannounced but within standard pharmacy business hours of your location.

 

[owlegrad]

I suspect that the pharmacist on duty would be responsible for the techs on their shift. After all what's the point of having a pharmacist on duty if they aren't responsible for the techs?

 

[farmadiazepine]

Bro, some of these hospital techs act like they are the boss when they work. I couldn't believe the lack of accountability for the techs when I started at my hospital. The pharmacists I worked with were such f*cking *****s. They worked there for years and didn't even know what the technician assignments, responsibilities, round schedules, etc were. Once I realized it's up to me to learn all that stuff, then I started making people accountable for everything. Glad I did.

I don't know how it is in other places, but when I work, I consider the pharmacy as mine. The techs that work with me are my techs, and not the other way around. What they do is a direct representation of me and what I enforce. Techs are an extension of the pharmacist. If you don't believe that, then good luck to you, everyone will walk right over you or not care.

I don't understand how you guys are aware of IV room techs not properly garbing up.

Also, when Board of Pharmacy comes in, the first thing you do is call your supervisor, who in turn will be calling the DOP.

 

[sakigt]

I mean, if you ask a tech to do something and they refuse that's now your bosman's problem. I prefer email.