| Summary: | 碩士 === 東吳大學 === 法律學系 === 103 === The Grand Justice Council declared Article 11 of the Pharmist Act one-place practice restriction was unconstitutional on July 31, 2013. Soon after this No.711 decision, Article 11 was revised on June 27, 2014 to a more flexiable way. Now, pharmacists who practice at a medical care institution or pharmacy may engage in professional practices at places other than their place of practice if they meet any of the following criteria and have obtained prior permission: (1) Drug addiction treatment or communicable disease prevention and control services; (2) Volunteer medical consultation or mobile medical services; (3) Functions related to pharmaceutical care; (4) Practice of dispensations in correctional institutions or remote areas without pharmaceutical personnel as announced by the central competent authority; (5)Public welfare or urgent needs as recognized by the central competent authority.
However, from pharmacist perspectives, they are not regulated by the Pharmacist Act, but also "Pharmaceutical Affairs Act", "Medical Care Act", "Nursing Personnel Act" and "Senior Citizen Welfare Act". Therefore, this thesis will examine the issues regardsing pharmacists practicing premises with pharmacist's professional concerns under the current laws and regulatons. In addition to analyzing various types of medical personnel to practice premises provisions, this thesis will try to propose further suggestions on legal amendments as well as for administrative management for pharmacist practices.
|
|---|
