MPJE Practice K-Type Questions & Answers
- ProntoPass Solutions
- Apr 29
- 12 min read
Updated: May 6
More Questions & Answers coming soon!
NEW YORK
In New York, regarding the supervising pharmacist in a registered pharmacy establishment:
I. The supervising pharmacist must be employed full-time, defined as 30 or more hours per week.
II. If the pharmacy operates less than 30 hours per week, the supervising pharmacist must be employed for at least half of the operating hours.
III. The owner must notify the State Board of Pharmacy within seven days of any change in the supervising pharmacist.
Which of the following is correct?
A) I only
B) II only
C) I and III
D) II and III
E) I, II, and III
Before you read I, II, III just consider I and determine if it is correct, wrong, or you don't know. Then do the same for II and then for III. Check which is the possible correct answer consistent your thoughts on each.
After you have an answer then scroll down to see the correct answer and why.
Do NOT scroll down until you have your answer.
Scroll down.
The answer
C) I and III, as statements I and III are correct, while statement II contains a subtle error.
Explanation
The explanation is condensed to fit the slide format while retaining essential details:
I: Correct – Regulations require the supervising pharmacist to be full-time, defined as 30 or more hours per week.
II: Incorrect – The requirement is for a majority (>50%) of operating hours, not “at least half,” which could include exactly 50%.
III: Correct – The owner must notify the State Board within seven days of a change in the supervising pharmacist.
This explanation highlights the critical distinction in statement II, which is designed to test precise regulatory knowledge.
Which of the following statements regarding the scheduling of benzodiazepines in New York State are correct?
I. Benzodiazepines are classified as Schedule II controlled substances in New York.
II. Federally, benzodiazepines are classified as Schedule IV controlled substances.
III. In New York, benzodiazepines have a higher potential for abuse than federally recognized.
IV. Pharmacists in New York must follow federal scheduling for benzodiazepines.
A) I and II
B) I, II, and III
C) II and IV
D) I, III, and IV
Before you read I, II, III just consider I and determine if it is correct, wrong, or you don't know. Then do the same for II and then for III. Check which is the possible correct answer consistent your thoughts on each.
After you have an answer then scroll down to see the correct answer and why.
Do NOT scroll down until you have your answer.
Scroll down.
Correct Answer
B) I, II, and III
Explanation
In New York State, benzodiazepines are classified as Schedule II controlled substances under Title 80.67 of the New York State Controlled Substances Act. This classification is stricter than the federal scheduling, where benzodiazepines are listed as Schedule IV controlled substances under the Controlled Substances Act (CSA). The difference in scheduling reflects New York's view that benzodiazepines pose a higher potential for abuse and dependence compared to the federal assessment.
Statement I: Correct. New York classifies benzodiazepines as Schedule II controlled substances.
Statement II: Correct. Federally, benzodiazepines are classified as Schedule IV controlled substances.
Statement III: Correct. By placing benzodiazepines in Schedule II, New York indicates a higher potential for abuse than the federal Schedule IV classification.
Statement IV: Incorrect. Pharmacists in New York must adhere to the state's stricter scheduling requirements rather than the federal scheduling when state law is more stringent.
This distinction has practical implications for pharmacists, including stricter prescription requirements (e.g., no refills for Schedule II drugs) and enhanced record-keeping obligations under New York law.
Citations
New York State Controlled Substances Act, Title 80.67 (PG.208 NY Statutes)
Federal Controlled Substances Act, 21 U.S.C. § 812
3. Which of the following statements regarding pharmacists’ authority to administer immunizations in New York are correct?
I. Pharmacists in New York can administer influenza vaccines to patients aged 2 to 18 years pursuant to a patient-specific or non-patient-specific order after receiving a certificate of administration.
II. Pharmacists with a certificate of administration can administer hepatitis C vaccines to patients 18 years or older pursuant to a patient-specific or non-patient-specific order.
III. Pharmacists can administer any immunization recommended by the CDC to patients 18 years or older, provided they meet certification requirements.
Options:
A. I only
B. II only
C. III only
D. I and II only
E. I and III only
F. II and III only
G. I, II, and III
Before you read I, II, III just consider I and determine if it is correct, wrong, or you don't know. Then do the same for II and then for III. Check which is the possible correct answer consistent your thoughts on each.
After you have an answer then scroll down to see the correct answer and why.
Do NOT scroll down until you have your answer.
Scroll down.
Answer
E. I and III only
Explanation
Statement I:
This statement is correct. According to the provided information, certified pharmacists in New York who meet the requirements are authorized to "administer to patients between the ages of two and 18 years of age, immunizing agents to prevent influenza, pursuant to a patient-specific order or a non-patient-specific order." This aligns with the authority granted after obtaining a certificate of administration from the State Education Department (SED), making the statement true.
Statement II:
This statement is incorrect. The provided information lists specific immunizing agents that certified pharmacists can administer to patients 18 years or older, including those to prevent influenza, pneumococcal, acute herpes zoster, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, human papillomavirus, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, COVID-19, meningococcal, tetanus, diphtheria, or pertussis disease. Notably, hepatitis C is not included in this list, as there is no widely recognized vaccine for hepatitis C recommended for routine administration. Thus, pharmacists are not authorized to administer hepatitis C vaccines under this statute.
Statement III:
This statement is correct. The provided information states that certified pharmacists are authorized to "administer other immunizations recommended by the CDC [for] patients 18 years of age." This broad authorization allows pharmacists to administer any CDC-recommended immunization (beyond the specifically listed ones) to adults 18 years or older, provided they have the required certification. The statement accurately reflects this authority.
Citations
New York Education Law, Article 137, § 6801 and § 6807: These sections outline the scope of practice for pharmacists, including the authority to administer immunizations after certification. The specific provisions for immunization administration are detailed in regulations by the Commissioner of Education.
New York Codes, Rules and Regulations (NYCRR), Title 8, § 63.9: This regulation specifies the certification requirements and the list of immunizing agents pharmacists can administer, including the conditions for patient-specific and non-patient-specific orders, as well as age restrictions.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Immunization Schedules: The CDC’s recommendations for adult immunizations are referenced in the statute for authorizing pharmacists to administer additional vaccines to patients 18 years or older.
Conclusion
Only statements I and III are correct based on the provided New York statute regarding pharmacists’ authority to administer immunizations. The answer is E. I and III only. This K-type question is challenging because it requires precise knowledge of the specific vaccines listed in the statute, the age groups eligible for immunization, and the broader authority tied to CDC recommendations, making it suitable for the New York MPJE.
4. Which of the following statements regarding the transmission of prescriptions for Schedule II narcotic substances in New York are correct?
I. A prescription for a Schedule II narcotic substance to be compounded for direct administration by parenteral, intravenous, intramuscular, subcutaneous, or intraspinal infusion can be transmitted by fax to the dispensing pharmacy.
II. The original official New York State prescription for a Schedule II narcotic substance transmitted by fax must be delivered to the pharmacist within 72 hours of transmission.
III. If the pharmacist does not receive the original prescription within 7 days, they must notify the Department of Health in writing or electronically.
Options:
A. I only
B. II only
C. III only
D. I and II only
E. I and III only
F. II and III only
G. I, II, and III
Before you read I, II, III just consider I and determine if it is correct, wrong, or you don't know. Then do the same for II and then for III. Check which is the possible correct answer consistent your thoughts on each.
After you have an answer then scroll down to see the correct answer and why.
Do NOT scroll down until you have your answer.
Scroll down.
Answer
D. I and II only
Explanation
Statement I: This statement is correct. According to the provided information, an official New York State prescription for a Schedule II narcotic substance intended for compounding and direct administration by parenteral, intravenous, intramuscular, subcutaneous, or intraspinal infusion can be transmitted by the practitioner (or their authorized agent) to the dispensing pharmacy by fax. This is an exception to the general rule that Schedule II prescriptions must be electronic under New York’s I-STOP law, specifically for these compounded preparations.
Statement II: This statement is correct. The provided information states that within 72 hours, the prescribing practitioner must ensure the original official New York State prescription (or an original out-of-state written prescription) is delivered to the pharmacist. This requirement ensures proper documentation and compliance with controlled substance regulations.
Statement III: This statement is incorrect. The provided information specifies that if the pharmacist fails to receive the original prescription, they must notify the Department of Health in writing or electronically within 7 days from the date of dispensing the substance, not within 7 days of the fax transmission. The discrepancy in the timeline (date of dispensing vs. date of transmission) makes this statement inaccurate, as the notification period is tied to the dispensing event, not the fax receipt.
Citations
New York Public Health Law, Article 33, § 3332(2)(b): This section allows certain Schedule II narcotic prescriptions, specifically those for compounding and direct administration via parenteral, intravenous, intramuscular, subcutaneous, or intraspinal infusion, to be transmitted by fax, with the requirement that the original prescription be delivered within 72 hours.
10 NYCRR § 80.67: This regulation further details the fax transmission exception for Schedule II prescriptions and the obligation of the pharmacist to notify the Department of Health if the original prescription is not received within 7 days from the date of dispensing.
New York I-STOP Law (Public Health Law § 3309-a): While this mandates electronic prescribing for most controlled substances, the exception for faxed prescriptions in specific cases, like those described, is upheld.
Conclusion
Only statements I and II are correct based on the provided New York statute regarding the fax transmission of Schedule II narcotic prescriptions for compounding and direct administration. The answer is D. I and II only. This K-type question is challenging because it tests knowledge of specific exceptions to electronic prescribing, the timeline for delivering original prescriptions, and the precise notification requirements, making it suitable for the New York MPJE.
NEVADA
A pharmacist in a Nevada community pharmacy receives a paper prescription for a Schedule II controlled substance, oxycodone 10 mg, with instructions to take one tablet every 6 hours as needed for pain. The prescription is dated 20 days ago and includes the prescriber’s DEA number. The patient requests the full quantity of 120 tablets. Upon checking the Nevada Prescription Monitoring Program (PMP), the pharmacist notices that the patient has received multiple early refills for opioids from different prescribers in the past three months.
Which of the following statements are true regarding the handling of this prescription under federal and Nevada law?
I. The pharmacist may dispense the prescription as written because it is still within the 30-day validity period for Schedule II prescriptions.
II. The pharmacist must verify the legitimacy of the prescription due to the patient’s history of early refills, as indicated in the PMP.
III. Nevada law requires the pharmacist to report suspected abuse or diversion of controlled substances to the Nevada State Board of Pharmacy.
IV. If the pharmacist decides to partially fill the prescription, the remaining quantity must be filled within 72 hours, or a new prescription is required.
Options:
A) I, II, and III
B) II, III, and IV
C) I, II, and IV
D) I, III, and IV
E) II and III
Before you read I, II, III just consider I and determine if it is correct, wrong, or you don't know. Then do the same for II and then for III. Check which is the possible correct answer consistent your thoughts on each.
After you have an answer then scroll down to see the correct answer and why.
Do NOT scroll down until you have your answer.
Scroll down.
Correct Answer: B) II, III, and IV
Explanation
Statement I: False
Under federal law (21 CFR 1306.11), Schedule II prescriptions must be filled within a reasonable time, often interpreted as up to 30 days from the date of issuance. However, Nevada law imposes a stricter requirement. According to Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 639.742, a Schedule II prescription must be dispensed within 15 days of the date it was issued. Since this prescription is dated 20 days ago, it is no longer valid in Nevada, and the pharmacist cannot dispense it as written.
Statement II: True
Federal law (21 CFR 1306.04) places a corresponding responsibility on pharmacists to ensure that controlled substance prescriptions are issued for a legitimate medical purpose by a prescriber acting within their scope of practice. Additionally, Nevada law (NRS 639.2353) reinforces this duty. The patient’s history of early refills from multiple prescribers, as noted in the PMP, raises a red flag for potential abuse or diversion. The pharmacist must verify the prescription’s legitimacy (e.g., by contacting the prescriber) before proceeding.
Statement III: True
Nevada law (NAC 639.926) requires pharmacists to report suspected abuse, diversion, or unlawful behavior involving controlled substances to the Nevada State Board of Pharmacy. The PMP data showing multiple early refills from different prescribers suggests possible “doctor shopping,” which is a form of potential diversion. The pharmacist is obligated to investigate and, if suspicion persists, report it to the Board.
Statement IV: True
Under federal law (21 CFR 1306.13), a pharmacist may partially fill a Schedule II prescription (e.g., if the pharmacy lacks sufficient stock or the patient requests less than the full amount). However, the remaining quantity must be dispensed within 72 hours, or a new prescription is required. While this prescription is invalid due to its age (20 days), the statement itself accurately reflects the partial filling rules for Schedule II prescriptions under federal law.
Correct Answer Breakdown
I is false: The prescription is invalid in Nevada after 15 days.
II is true: Verification is required due to the patient’s PMP history.
III is true: Reporting suspected abuse is mandated by Nevada law.
IV is true: Partial filling rules are correctly stated.
Thus, the correct combination is II, III, and IV, making the answer B.
Key Takeaways for Nevada MPJE Preparation
This question tests several critical areas:
Time Limits: Nevada’s 15-day rule for Schedule II prescriptions is stricter than the federal guideline (NAC 639.742).
Pharmacist Responsibility: Federal and Nevada laws require vigilance against abuse or diversion (21 CFR 1306.04, NRS 639.2353).
PMP and Reporting: Nevada mandates PMP checks and reporting of suspected issues (NAC 639.926).
Partial Filling: Federal rules allow partial fills with a 72-hour limit (21 CFR 1306.13).
For further study, review the Controlled Substances Act, Nevada Revised Statutes (NRS) Chapter 639, and Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) Chapter 639. Focus on how Nevada’s regulations differ from federal standards, especially regarding controlled substances.
VIRGINIA
Which of the following statements regarding emergency contraception in Virginia are correct?
I. Pharmacists in Virginia can issue a prescription for emergency contraception to patients who are 18 years or older, provided the patient completes an assessment consistent with the United States Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use.
II. Federal law allows the over-the-counter sale of emergency contraceptives to individuals of any age without a prescription.
III. The assessment required for pharmacists to prescribe emergency contraception must be completed by the pharmacist.
Options:
A. I only
B. II only
C. III only
D. I and II only
E. I and III only
F. II and III only
G. I, II, and III
Before you read I, II, III just consider I and determine if it is correct, wrong, or you don't know. Then do the same for II and then for III. Check which is the possible correct answer consistent your thoughts on each.
After you have an answer then scroll down to see the correct answer and why.
Do NOT scroll down until you have your answer.
Scroll down.
Answer
D. I and II only
Explanation
Statement I:
This statement is correct. According to the Virginia state statute provided, "A pharmacist may issue a prescription to initiate treatment with, dispense, or administer... injectable or self-administered hormonal emergency contraceptives (EC) to persons 18 years of age or older," provided the patient completes an assessment consistent with the United States Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use. The phrasing of the statement aligns with this legal authority, making it true.
Statement II:
This statement is also correct. Federal law permits the over-the-counter (OTC) sale of emergency contraceptives, such as Plan B One-Step, to individuals of any age without a prescription. Although the query mentions "anyone of child-bearing age," the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) removed age restrictions for OTC emergency contraceptives in 2013, allowing access to all individuals regardless of age. Thus, this statement accurately reflects federal law.
Statement III:
This statement is incorrect. The Virginia statute specifies that the patient completes the assessment consistent with the United States Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, not the pharmacist. While the pharmacist may review or ensure the assessment meets the required criteria before issuing a prescription, the act of completing the assessment is the patient’s responsibility. Therefore, stating that the assessment "must be completed by the pharmacist" is false.
Conclusion
Only statements I and II are correct based on the Virginia state statute and federal law provided. Thus, the answer is D. I and II only. This K-type question effectively tests the distinction between state-specific prescribing authority and federal OTC regulations, as well as the procedural details of the assessment process, making it suitable for the VA MPJE.
Comments