Saturday Corneal Ulcer, a Phone-In for the Spouse, and Samples for the Daughter
Dr. Osei is covering a Saturday clinic when a 24-year-old daily soft contact lens wearer presents with a three-day history of a painful red left eye. He has not slept in his lenses, but he swims in them. Best-corrected acuity is 20/60 in the affected eye, and there is a 3 mm paracentral infiltrate with an overlying epithelial defect, 1+ anterior chamber cells, and no hypopyon. Dr. Osei plans to start moxifloxacin every hour while awake, add prednisolone acetate 1% four times daily beginning today, and recheck on Monday. The patient is uninsured and asks for samples to get through the weekend. That evening, Dr. Osei's wife develops a red, discharging eye; he telephones tobramycin-dexamethasone to the pharmacy in her name without examining her or creating a chart. His 15-year-old daughter then complains of itchy eyes, and he hands her a sample bottle of olopatadine from the office cabinet.
1. Critique the ulcer management plan, including the steroid decision and the follow-up interval.
Read the worked answer
The diagnosis is plausible, but the plan has two weak points. First, starting a topical steroid on the same day as the antibiotic, before the organism is controlled and before any response to therapy is seen, risks promoting melting if this is a fungal or atypical infection or a heavily loaded bacterial ulcer. The usual approach is to start the fluoroquinolone alone, reassess at 24 hours, and add a steroid only once the epithelial defect is clearly improving.
Second, Monday is too long for a 3 mm paracentral ulcer with cells and a two-line acuity drop. Twenty-four hours is the appropriate recheck, with clear instructions to return sooner for worsening pain, discharge, or vision.
Referral thresholds should be documented: central location, size over roughly 3 mm, hypopyon, worsening cells, acuity decline, no improvement at 24 to 48 hours, or any suspicion of fungal or acanthamoeba involvement. The record must show the reasoning, the dosing, the lens instructions, and the return precautions.
2. What is wrong with phoning in a prescription for his wife, and what should he have done?
Read the worked answer
Prescribing for a spouse without an examination, without a chart, and without any objective documentation is a conflict-of-interest problem and a records problem at the same time. He cannot be objective about her, he cannot document the findings that justify the drug, and the pharmacy record now names him as the prescriber for an encounter that never happened.
A combined antibiotic-steroid is also a poor empirical choice for an undifferentiated red, discharging eye, since it can mask or worsen something herniating or viral, and the steroid obscures the response to the antibiotic.
The defensible path is to have a colleague examine her, or to bring her in, open a proper record, examine her as any other patient, document the findings, and prescribe based on them. Many practitioners simply decline to treat immediate family for anything beyond trivial care and refer instead. Whatever he chooses, he must not create a prescription without a corresponding clinical record.
3. What are the requirements for the samples he hands his daughter, and how should sample dispensing be documented?
Read the worked answer
Samples are still prescribing and dispensing. Giving a bottle to a 15-year-old from the office cabinet, with no chart, no documented indication, and no record of what was given, is a recordkeeping failure regardless of how benign the drug is.
His daughter should be treated as a patient: a record documenting the history, the findings, the diagnosis, the drug, the strength, the quantity, the lot number, and the date dispensed. Because she is a minor, the consent and communication issues should be handled the way the practice handles any 15-year-old, but the clinical documentation requirement does not disappear because the patient is his child.
More broadly, the practice needs a sample log: drug, lot, expiration, quantity, recipient, date, and the prescriber. Samples must not be billed to insurers, and they must be stored and disposed of properly. A cabinet handed out informally with no log is exactly the pattern that produces a Board inquiry after a patient has an adverse reaction and no one can reconstruct what was dispensed.