Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Medico-legal aspects of “off-licence” prescribing in Obstetrics ENTER 2006 CONFERENCE Saj Shah Solicitor/Pharmacist 3 May 2006 INTRODUCTION CURRENT ISSUES AND TRENDS Prevalence Off-licence drugs in pregnancy • Unique patient population • Reluctance to undertake trials in vulnerable population • Survey of 731 birthing women: 23% received off-licence drugs • • [Rayburn and Farmer, 1997] In some cases prescribing in pregnancy is unavoidable Which drug should be prescribed? • Efficacy • Safety • Cost Important considerations • Risk management • Clinical Governance • Patient experience • Medical litigation Adverse events in healthcare Other General Surgery Accident & Emergency Anaesthetics Orthopaedics Gynaecology 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Obstetrics Closed Claims Identifying Clinical Risk through Claims: UK experience (March 1993 - July 1995) PRESCRIBING AND THE LAW Liabilities Liabilities Public Patient • Criminal Law • Civil Law • Criminal Courts • Civil Courts DOCTOR Profession Employer • Code of Professional Conduct (GMC) • Contract of Employment • Professional Conduct Committee of GMC •Employment Tribunal Clinical negligence • • • Duty of care • Established law Breach of duty of care • Standard of an ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill • “…a doctor is not negligent if he acts in accordance with a practice accepted at the time as proper by a responsible body of medical opinion Caused injury, loss or damage • “but-for” test? Vicarious liability “OFF-LICENCE” MEDICINES AND THE LAW Licensing of medicines • Thalidomide tragedy • Medicines Act 1968 • New licensing legislation implemented (MAR 1994) • Administered by MHRA / EMEA • Purpose – ensure efficacy, safety and quality • Rigorous testing Development of a drug Reference: ABPI website: ‘Medicines: Tried and Tested – Or an Unknown Risk?’ (2004) Importance of the SPC • “SPC is the most authoritative source of information available on drug doses and indications and contains essential practical prescribing information” Sir Michael Rawlins – previous Chairman of Committee Safety of Medicines, UK • “The SPC is the basis of information for health professionals on how to use the medicinal product safely and effectively” European Commission guidance Failure in LICENCED drug therapy • Manufacturer liable in design, manufacture and marketing: • Negligence • Strict liability under the Consumer Protection Act 1987 Failure in OFF LICENCE drug therapy • • Defence for the manufacturer • Negligence and Strict liability • “Informed intermediary doctrine” Implications • Pharmacological; and • Legal Legal implications • Liability falls to the prescriber • Increases own responsibility • Carries burden of patients welfare • May be called upon to justify actions if damage results Practical aspects: off-licence medicines BREACH OF DUTY • Logical analysis • Compare with gold standard scrutiny of licensing process Practical aspects: off-licence medicines CONSENT • Failure to warm/inform • Chester v Afshar – October 2004 (House of Lords) • Traditionally strong defence rejected • Implications are significant • Poses problem for those prescribing off-label medicines • Must advise patient on risks, benefits and alternatives Consenting process flow chart Risk management considerations • • Does alternative licensed medicine meet patient needs? Is there high quality evidence supporting efficacy or effectiveness? • Doctor must: • Take responsibility for prescribing • Make accurate record of reasons • Obtain appropriate consent (written) Sensible prescribing • • • Deviation from SPC has potential to endanger public safety and breach legal and professional requirements Overriding issue – will it affect the patient? Only consider if: • Imperative to continue treatment; and • No alternative available “Let doctors prescribe as they see fit” • Absence of evidence of harm is NOT the same as evidence of absence of harm