Dilsha Kiran Shah, registration number 2049787, was found by the regulator’s investigating committee to have breached three standards for pharmacy professionals, according to a warning document published by the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) on March 25.

GPhC inspectors found that two Jhoots branches had dispensed prescription-only medicines (POMs) without an RP present.

Read more: Supervision reform proposals could pose ‘risk to patient safety', DH admits

In “around August 2021”, a Jhoots pharmacy was reported to the GPhC for “operating without a responsible pharmacist”. The regulator’s investigating committee heard that staff at the pharmacy had been instructed to "continue operating" without an RP present.

The GPhC’s assessment team “confirmed” at the time that the pharmacy had created an “unreasonable and unjustified risk”.

Shah was “notified” by the regulator in the same month that a further such lapse could result in a fitness-to-practise investigation.

But while inspecting a different Jhoots branch in May 2022, the regulator found this pharmacy was also operating without an RP present.

Read more: Supervision proposals: ‘The greatest pharmacy evolution in 70 years’

Inspectors witnessed firsthand a patient being supplied with a POM even though there was no RP at the pharmacy, according to the warning.

The warning document said staff at this branch told the inspectors that they had been “instructed” to continue operating and dispensing without an RP present, and did so despite knowing that they should not do so.

The GPhC found that Shah had “failed to ensure” that the pharmacies under her purview were only dispensing or supplying POMs if there was an RP present, and “failed to ensure” that the staff had not been directed to operate in such a fashion.

As a result, the regulator found that Shah’s conduct had breached pharmacy professional standards related to professional judgment, professional behaviour, and leadership.

Read more: UPDATED: DH launches long-awaited pharmacy supervision consultation

She was warned that “similar conduct” would lead to “further regulatory intervention”.

The warning states that Jhoots staff should “on no account” receive instructions to supply or dispense without an RP present.

Jhoots was approached for comment.

Read the full warning here.

 

Supervision latest

 

In December, the Department of Health and Social Care (DH) announced a 12-week consultation on plans that would allow checked and bagged prescribed medicines to be handed out in a pharmacy in the absence of a pharmacist – where authorised by a pharmacist.

In response, Community Pharmacy England’s (CPE) legal director Gordon Hockey said that the industry negotiator welcomed the consultation, adding that it was “important to ensure that pharmacies can make best use of the skill mix across the whole team”.

Read more: What’s the law on pharmacy supervision?

But C+D reported that the DH itself admitted in an “impact assessment” published alongside the consultation that the proposed changes pose a “potential risk to patient safety”, writing that “the reduced pharmacist supervision could increase the number of errors made”.

According to GPhC’s register, accessed on April 9, there are 140 pharmacies trading as Jhoots Pharmacy, of which 14 fall under Jhoots Healthcare Limited. None of the inspection reports for Jhoots Healthcare pharmacies on the GPhC’s register show it operating without an RP.