Public Notifications

1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia the (“College”) conducted investigations into the conduct of now former registrant Dai Wei (“David”) Wang (the “Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”). Further to a proposal for resolution from the Registrant, the Inquiry Committee made a Consent Order under section 37.1 of the HPA.
    

2. Effective date: April 27, 2023

3. Name of registrant: Dai Wei (“David”) Wang

4. Location of Practice: Vancouver, BC

5. Admissions and Acknowledgements: 

   The Registrant has admitted and/or acknowledged the following:

   1. he failed to respond to requests for information made in multiple investigations despite numerous follow-up communications from the College made by email, and telephone;

   2. his conduct as described in paragraph 5(a) constitutes both a breach of the ethical obligations set out in Standard 7(a) to (e) of the Code of Ethics and unprofessional conduct as defined in section 26 of the HPA.

6. Disposition:

   The Consent Order made by the Inquiry Committee under section 37.1 of the HPA, included the following terms:

   1. a written reprimand;

   2. a one-month suspension to be served following any reinstatement to Full Pharmacist registration with the College;

   3. payment of costs in the amount of $10,000 to the College; and

   4. an undertaking to complete the PROBE Ethics and Boundaries Program, achieving an unconditional pass, prior to returning to the practice of pharmacy, whether in British Columbia or in any other jurisdiction.
       

7. Rationale:

   The Registrant failed to cooperate with three College investigations. He failed to reply to numerous communication attempts made by the College investigator who had sought a response and further information in regards to a first investigation. The Registrant’s failure to acknowledge and respond to the College investigator for the first investigation caused a second investigation to be initiated regarding the Registrant’s failure to respond. Despite being advised of this second investigation and reminded of his duty to cooperate with both investigations and respond to the investigator’s requests further to those investigations, the Registrant again failed to respond. The Registrant also failed to respond to questions from the College’s Licensure Department regarding pharmacy licensure information, which led to the commencement of a third investigation. The College investigator advised the Registrant of this third investigation and sought a response, but, again, no response was provided. These investigations generated unnecessary expenses for the College.

   After the issuance of a Citation, the Registrant advised the College of issues affecting his personal life at the time of the investigations. The Registrant acknowledged he ought to have advised the College of these issues, and that failing respond to the investigation was unacceptable, as it impeded the College from carrying out its public duty.

   College representatives, including investigators inquiring into allegations of misconduct are carrying out the College’s public protection mandate and must be treated with respect. When repeated communication attempts are made by a College investigator it is inappropriate and disrespectful to ignore these inquiries. College representatives require the cooperation of registrants to carry out their work effectively. This includes providing timely answers to questions posed by investigators. When registrants do not cooperate with investigators and College investigations, they undermine the ability of the College to properly regulate the profession and protect the public and cause wastage of the College’s finite resources.

   In light of these factors, the Inquiry Committee therefore considered it appropriate that the disposition be one that serves as a strong deterrent and sends a clear message to both the profession and the public that the College does not tolerate failure by registrants to cooperate with a College investigation.

1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of BC (the “College”) investigated a complaint about the conduct of Aftabahmed Abdullatif Shaikh (the “Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(1) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”).
   
   The Inquiry Committee and the Registrant have agreed to resolve all matters arising from the investigation by way of a Consent Agreement under section 36(1) of the HPA. 

2. Effective date: March 10, 2023

3. Name of registrant: Aftabahmed Abdullatif Shaikh

4. Location of Practice: Various locations, BC

5. Admissions and Acknowledgements:
   The Registrant has admitted and/or acknowledged the following:

   1. On August 8 and 30, 2021, while working at a community pharmacy, the Registrant entered COVID-19 vaccinations onto their own PharmaNet record without actually having been administered the vaccines.
       
   2. The Registrant recorded that another pharmacist was the authorizing pharmacist and injection administrator for both vaccinations. The other pharmacist was not aware of the Registrant’s actions.
       
   3. The Registrant altered their personal information on the pharmacy’s software in a manner that would make the records more difficult to find. This included altering the spelling of their name, date of birth, removing their personal health number, and making the profile inactive.
       

6. Disposition:

   The Registrant entered into a Consent Agreement with the College’s Inquiry Committee, wherein the Registrant consented to terms that included (but not limited to) the following:

   1. To be suspended as a registrant of the College for a period of 30 days from March 13, 2023 to April 11, 2023;

   2. To not be a preceptor for pharmacy students for a period of two years from March 13, 2023 to March 12, 2025;

   3. To have a permanent letter of reprimand placed on the College register;

   4. To personally notify appropriate personnel at the BC Ministry of Health regarding their false vaccination records. The College would also refer details of the investigation to appropriate personnel at the BC Ministry of Health;

   5. To review and complete the College’s Code of Ethics Educational Tutorial; and
       
   6. To prepare a letter of apology to the other pharmacist.
       

7. Rationale:

   The Inquiry Committee considered that the Registrant created false PharmaNet records and subsequently obtained a COVID-19 vaccine passport by false pretense. The vaccine passport could have been used to circumvent vaccination requirements both domestically and internationally during the COVID-19 pandemic. The false vaccine passport could have put the public at increased risk of harm. The Registrant’s actions were self-serving and contrary to the conduct expected of a pharmacy professional. The Inquiry Committee considered the Registrant’s conduct a “serious matter” as defined by the HPA.
   
   The Inquiry Committee ultimately concluded the Registrant’s conduct was highly unethical and amounted to professional misconduct. The Inquiry Committee considered the terms of the Consent Agreement necessary to protect the public, a well as send a clear message deterrence to the profession.

To enable the Registrant to complete the practicum portion of the UBC Canadian Pharmacy Practice Programme, the Inquiry Committee has temporarily lifted the Registrant’s suspension until April 5, 2023. Until April 5, 2023, the Registrant is restricted to only processing prescriptions at the pharmacy for which she is completing her practicum, under the supervision of a preceptor.

July 14, 2022

(January 26, 2023 - Temporary Lifting of Suspension)
 

1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (the “College”) conducted an investigation into a complaint about the practice of Joelle Mbamy (the “Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(1) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”). 

   The Inquiry Committee and the Registrant have agreed to resolve all matters arising from the investigation by way of a Consent Agreement under section 36(1) of the HPA.

2. Effective date: July 14, 2022

3. Name of registrant: Joelle Mbamy

4. Location of Practice: Penticton, BC

5. Admissions and acknowledgements:

   The Registrant admitted and/or acknowledged the following:

   On or about September 15, 2021, the Registrant dispensed a medication to a patient from a prescription dated March 30, 2021. Before dispensing this medication to the patient, the Registrant did not confirm the patient’s diagnosis, did not conduct a clinical assessment of the appropriateness of the medication and the prescribed dose, and did not provide the patient with information required for a pharmacist/patient consultation.

6. Disposition:

   The Registrant entered into a Consent Agreement with the College’s Inquiry Committee, wherein the Registrant consented to terms that included (but not limited to) the following:

   1. To be suspended as a registrant of the College for a period of one year, from July 18, 2022 to July 17, 2023;

   2. Before the suspension in paragraph a is lifted, the Registrant must, at her own expense, successfully complete and pass the following:
       
      1. UBC Canadian Pharmacy Practice Programme, in its entirety; and
          

      2. The Pharmacy Qualifying Examination, Part II (OSCE) through the Pharmacy Examining Board of Canada. 

   3. To not be a pharmacy manager, director, owner (direct or indirect) and preceptor for pharmacy students for a period of five years from the date that her suspension ends

   4. After the completion of her suspension, upon return to active practice, to practice for a period of 180 days under the supervision of a pharmacist in good standing; and

   5. To appear before the Inquiry Committee for a verbal reprimand after completing her suspension.

7. Rationale

   In this case, the Registrant’s actions, or lack thereof, contravened sections of the Community Pharmacy Standards of Practice and the Code of Ethics. The Registrant neglected her basic duties as a pharmacist, did not protect and promote the well-being of her patient, did not act in the best interests of her patient, and placed her patient at risk of harm.

   Between 2017 and 2020, the Registrant had been sanctioned for other matters by the Inquiry Committee. Despite this, the Registrant has continued a pattern of non-adherence to practice standards. Her prior history, pattern of poor professional judgment, and demonstration of a disregard for the fundamentals of pharmacy practice is considered significant professional misconduct as defined in s. 26 of the HPA and warranted the significant remediation and sanctions referenced above.

   The Inquiry Committee considered it appropriate that the disposition for such conduct be one that serves as a strong deterrent and sends a clear message to both the profession and the public that the College cannot and will not tolerate this type of conduct under any circumstances.

April 7, 2021

The Registrant has completed all remedial training necessary for the removal of limits and conditions on her practice. Limits and conditions on the Registrant’s registration as a pharmacist have been removed effective April 7, 2021.

October 26, 2020
(April 7, 2021 - Limits and Conditions Removed)
 

1. Nature of Action: The Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia (“CPBC”) conducted investigations into the practice of Joelle Mbamy (the “Registrant”), pursuant to section 33(4) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”).  The CPBC issued a Citation on October 21, 2019, which was subsequently amended on January 29, 2020.

   Further to a proposal for resolution from the Registrant, the Inquiry Committee made a Consent Order under section 37.1 of the HPA.

2. Effective date: October 26, 2020

3. Name of registrant: Joelle Mbamy

4. Location of Practice: Penticton, BC

5. Admissions and acknowledgements:

   The Registrant has admitted and/or acknowledged the following (in part):
   
   The Inspection

   On November 6, 2018, the CPBC conducted an inspection of Sunrise Pharmacy (the “Inspection”) where the Registrant was acting as an owner, manager, and working pharmacist. The Inspection was conducted pursuant to a Consent Agreement the Registrant entered into with the CPBC on May 1, 2018, regarding a previous complaint and investigation.

   Contrary to Standards 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, and 9 of the Health Professions Act – Bylaws, Schedule “A” – the Code of Ethics (“Code of Ethics”), the Registrant was observed to have failed to comply with the terms of the Consent Agreement as during the Inspection, the following conduct was observed that constitutes a breach of the terms of the Consent Agreement:

   In addition, during the Inspection, the following conduct was observed which constituted additional or new offences, not previously addressed in the Consent Agreement:
    

   Pharmacy Security

   On March 22, 2018, the CPBC received information from the Province’s Child Death Coroner regarding the death of a minor who, at the time of his death, was an employee at Sunrise Pharmacy. The cause of death was methadone overdose.

   Upon reviewing security camera recordings from Sunrise Pharmacy, it was determined that, on September 18, 2017 and contrary to Standards 1 (a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 18(2)(j), 19(4) and 26 of the PODSA Bylaws, and Professional Practice Policy 74: Community Pharmacy and Telepharmacy Security, the minor was permitted to be in the dispensary and the compounding rooms in Sunrise Pharmacy without supervision on thirteen separate occasions for varying lengths of time.

   During these times, the minor had access to prescription medications. However, there was no evidence on the security footage to confirm that the minor obtained the methadone from the pharmacy.

   Temporary Closure of Sunrise Pharmacy

   In July 2019, the CPBC received a complaint about and conducted an investigation into the temporary closure of Sunrise Pharmacy on three consecutive Saturdays in June 2019 and found that

   1. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 6, 9, and 9.1 of Part 1 of Schedule “F” – the Standards of Practice (the “Part 1 of the Standards of Practice”), Professional Practice Policy 66: Opioid Agonist Treatment, and Principles 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3.1.3, 3.2.4 Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), Ms. Mbamy was dispensing methadone or Opioid Agonist Treatment (“OAT”) without the appropriate directions or without appropriate completion of the required documentation or both
       

   2. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, section 19(5)(a) of the CPBC’s Bylaws under PODSA (the “PODSA Bylaws”), and Professional Practice Policy 31: Emergency Prescription Refills, the Registrant was dispensing medication without a prescription, using her name as a prescriber, and in a manner that did not comply with the requirements for an emergency prescription refill;

   3. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, section 11 of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, and section 35 of the PODSA Bylaws, prescriptions, including prescriptions for methadone and other Schedule 1 drugs, were “backdated” such that the dispensing date entered on PharmaNet or recorded on the prescription label did not accurately reflect the date those prescriptions were dispensed; and

   4. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 18(2)(j) and 26 of the PODSA Bylaws, Professional Practice Policy-74: Community Pharmacy and Telepharmacy Security, and section 43 of the Narcotic Control Regulations, the Registrant failed to store methadone in a time-lock safe, or she stored methadone in a time-lock safe that was left open.

   5. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics and sections 8 and 11 of the Food and Drugs Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-27, the Registrant prepared an intravenous solution in an unsanitary and non-sterile environment without taking precautions to avoid contamination of the drug product and dispensed that solution to the patient’s agent;
       

   6. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, and sections 19(2) and 20(4) of the PODSA Bylaws, expired drugs were not stored in a separate area or secured storage area within Sunrise Pharmacy;

   7. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics,  Professional Practice Policy 68: Cold Chain Management of Biologicals, and the BCCDC Communicable Disease Control Immunization Program: Section VI – Management of Biologicals, vaccines and insulin were stored in the door of a refrigerator;

   8. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 9, 9.1, and 11(1) and (2) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, Professional Practice Policy 66: Opioid Agonist Treatment, and Principles 3.1.3, 3.2.4, and 3.2.5 of Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), information regarding prescriptions recorded on PharmaNet was incorrect or incomplete. 

   9. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics, section 19(6)(b) of the PODSA Bylaws, Principle 2.1.2, of Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), the Registrant was selling or dispensing drugs included in the controlled prescription program (“CPP”) when the required CPP form did not contain either the signature of the dispensing pharmacist or the signature of the patient;

   10. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics and Professional Practice Policy 31: Emergency Prescription Refills, emergency prescription refills were improperly provided or documented;

   11. contrary to Standards 1(a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics, sections 6(4)(g)(iv) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice the Sunrise Pharmacy patient counselling log did not include written confirmation of who performed consultations or document when consultation was offered and declined;

   12. contrary to Standards 1 (a) and (d) and 7 of the Code of Ethics and sections 35(1), (4), (5), and (6) of the PODSA Bylaws and with respect to a specific prescription dated August 9, 2018, the PharmaNet patient record was not kept current; and

   13. contrary to Standards 1 (a) and (d), and 7 of the Code of Ethics, and section 18(2)(m) of the PODSA Bylaws, staff at Sunrise Pharmacy did not wear name badges.

   14. contrary to section 25.92 of the HPA, and sections 10(1) and (2) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, the Registrant, without prior authorization, changed the dispensing regime of four different methadone prescriptions in order to accommodate the closure of Sunrise Pharmacy,

   15. contrary to Principle 2.2.1 of Professional Practice Policy 66: Policy Guide – Methadone Maintenance Treatment (2013), the Registrant altered a prescription and began dispensing methadone pursuant to that altered prescription and failed to obtain a corrected prescription from the physician, and

   16. contrary to section 9.1(1)(b) of Part 1 of the Standards of Practice, the Registrant dispensed Suboxone^® with incorrect instructions on the label.

6. Disposition:

   In the Consent Order under section 37.1 of the HPA, the Inquiry Committee ordered that the Registrant

   The Registrant repeatedly contravened sections of the HPA, PODSA Bylaws, Community Pharmacy Standards of Practice, and the Code of Ethics in her practice as a pharmacist, pharmacy manager, owner and director, and thereby, neglected her basic duties as a pharmacist, and committed or allowed actions that were unethical and could potentially endanger patient health. The totality of her conduct demonstrated an egregious breach of trust and undermines the integrity of the profession.

   Importantly, the Inspection was conducted only a few month after the Consent Agreement was finalized. Despite this, Ms. Mbamy was found to be in breach of several of the terms of that Consent Agreement and was noted to have engaged in further breaches of the standards applying to the practice of pharmacy. This demonstrated a disregard for the fundamentals of pharmacy practice and the CPBC’s regulatory process. More importantly, it presented a significant risk to the public.

   The Registrant’s conduct in this instance, coupled with the breach of her previous undertakings, is considered significant professional misconduct as defined in s. 26 of the HPA, and justifies serious consequences. The Inquiry Committee therefore considered it appropriate, and the Registrant agreed, that the disposition for such conduct be one that serves as a strong deterrent and sends a clear message to both the profession and the public that the CPBC cannot and will not tolerate this type of conduct under any circumstances.

   1. sign and deliver to the CPBC a letter of undertaking,

   2. be suspended for 3 months (November 18, 2020 to February 18, 2021),
       
   3. subject to paragraph d below, for a period of 18 months (including the time during which she had been subject to the same conditions on practice further to the May 23, 2019 Inquiry Committee order), cannot
       
      1. dispense any narcotic or controlled drug substance intended for Opioid Agonist Treatment,
          

      2. compound any medication, or

      3. prepare or dispense any medication intended for intravenous administration.

   4. before the conditions specified in paragraph c are removed from her practice, must, at her own expense,

      1. retake and successfully complete
          

         • the BC Pharmacy Association OAT Compliance and Management Program, and

         • the BC Community Manger Training Program,

      2. successfully complete;

         • the CPEP PROBE: Ethics & Boundaries Program,

         • the UBC CPD Provincial Opioid Addiction Treatment Support Program,

         • the Critical Point, Best Practices for Nonhazardous Sterile-to-Sterile Compounding, and

      3. confirm in writing that she has

         • read “A Guideline for Clinical Management of Opioid Use Disorder” from the BC Centre on Substance Use, and

         • reviewed the YouTube videos, Ontario College of Pharmacists, “Optimizing Patient Care Series: Decision Making & Documentation – Keeping it Simple”, Parts 1 and 2,

   5. must pay a fine of $20,000 to the CPBC

May 23, 2019
(October 26, 2020 - Citation cancelled)

Pursuant to section 35(1)(a) of the Health Professions Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 183 (“HPA”), effective May 23, 2019, the Inquiry Committee of the College of Pharmacists of British Columbia has made an order to impose limits and conditions on the pharmacy practice of the registrant Joelle Mbamy (the “Registrant”) pending a hearing of the Discipline Committee.

The Registrant will be restricted from dispensing any narcotic or controlled drug substance intended for Opioid Agonist Treatment. This limit and condition will become effective on June 7, 2019 to allow sufficient time to transition patients to another pharmacy.

The Registrant will be restricted from compounding any medication and preparing or dispensing any medication intended for intravenous administration.

The Inquiry Committee considered this action necessary to protect the public.

While practicing as a pharmacist, the Registrant is alleged to have shown a continuing pattern of providing Opioid Agonist Treatment without abiding by the legislative requirements. While practicing as a pharmacist, the Registrant is alleged to have prepared and dispensed intravenous drug product under unsanitary conditions.

Note: Limits and conditions ordered by the Inquiry Committee under section 35(1)(a) of the HPA are made to protect the public during an investigation or pending a hearing of the Discipline Committee. Orders made under this section relate to matters which are and remain unproven unless admitted by a registrant or determined by the Discipline Committee.

The Inquiry Committee, pursuant to section 32.2(4)(b)(ii) of the Health Professions Act, has reached an Agreement with the pharmacist registrant to voluntarily suspend their registration as a pharmacist effective August 29, 2022. The Agreement remains in effect until further notice. The Inquiry Committee considers the Agreement necessary to protect the public. The pharmacist registrant’s name has been withheld pursuant to section 39.3(4)(a) of the Health Professions Act.