Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHope, Deniseen_US
dc.contributor.authorDickfos, Steven T.en_US
dc.contributor.authorEllerby, Rachel E.en_US
dc.contributor.authorKing, Michelleen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-12T01:30:43Z
dc.date.available2018-12-12T01:30:43Z
dc.date.issued2016en_US
dc.identifier.issn1445-937Xen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jppr.1179en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/100872
dc.description.abstractBackground: Medicare and the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme may suggest to patients that medicines supply is the same everywhere in Australia. National Registration of Health Practitioners removed barriers to practitioners working interstate. Aim: To identify variations in state and territory medicines legislation with potential to negatively impact patients or practitioners. Method: Australian state and territory Acts and Regulations related to medicines prescribing and provision were compared. Legislative variations with potential to either harm patients, or increase health practitioners’ legal or ethical risk, were identified. Results: Potential patient harm may occur due to inconsistent requirements for prescription particulars, retention of prescription repeats by pharmacies in some states, or variation in age restriction on medicines provision. Potential practitioner risk may arise due to inconsistencies in practitioners’ prescribing rights or variable requirements to prescribe or dispense medicines. Conclusion: Ideally, all Australian states and territories should adopt uniform medicines legislation.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.publisherWiley Onlineen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom201en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto208en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue3en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Pharmacy Practice and Researchen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume46en_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchClinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Practiceen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode111503en_US
dc.titleBorderline health: jurisdictional variation in Australian medicines legislation poses potential risks to patients and healthcare practitionersen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
dc.description.versionPost-printen_US
gro.facultyGriffith Health, School of Pharmacy and Pharmacologyen_US
gro.rights.copyright© 2016 The Society of Hospital Pharmacists of Australia. This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Borderline health: jurisdictional variation in Australian medicines legislation poses potential risks to patients and healthcare practitioners, Journal of Pharmacy Practice and Research, Volume 46, Issue 3, Pages 201-208, 2016, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/jppr.1179. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving (http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-828039.html)en_US
gro.hasfulltextFull Text


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record