Former nurse headed to trial for alleged drug thefts |

Former nurse headed to trial for alleged drug thefts

A Manor Township woman will face further prosecution in Jefferson County on accusations that she illegally obtained drugs from Brookville Hospital’s pharmacy where she was employed.

Tricia J. Haugh, 37, of Tartan Drive, was charged by narcotics agents from the state attorney general’s office with 12 counts of falsifying records, two counts of illegally obtaining Fentanyl and one count of possession of Fentanyl.

She waived her right to a preliminary hearing before District Judge Richard Beck in Brookville.

According to investigators, Haugh was a certified registered nurse anesthetist at the hospital where she allegedly took out larger medications from the hospital’s pharmacy than necessary to treat her patients. The drugs included highly-addictive prescription narcotics Diprivan, used as a general anesthetic; Flumazenil, used to counter the effects of anesthetic; and Fentanyl, a narcotic pain reliever.

Court documents say that, in October 2009, Haugh was seen singing and talking to herself and was unable to remain still while working as an anesthetist in the hospital operating room. She declined to take a drug test after being removed from the operating room.

Investigators said a sealed syringe, a full and sealed vial of Diprivan and a full and sealed vial of Flumazenil were found in Haugh’s employee locker. Upon investigation, agents found that between August and October 2009, 12 out of 21 patient records had discrepancies in Fentanyl administration during their procedures.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.