Chitownlady
Member
Reged: 10/30/03
Posts: 114
Loc: IL
|
|
Walgreens, CVS, Osco are the absolute worst! Every time I get a script for a pain med filled, the pharmacist somehow manages to call the prescribing doctor and go over my history (after I leave the store of course!) -- Now, if I am supposedly "red flagged" at these chains - why do they keep dispensing the meds to me? Only to fax a history of my pain med usage to the doc afterwards? I just dont get it.
|
Steffie
Member
Reged: 04/11/02
Posts: 107
Loc: Southwest
|
|
OK - It's called the "Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1990". It basically states "maintaining patient medication profiles, performing a prospetive drug review and offering to counsel the patient or the patient's caregiver about the patient's medications". Still think the pharmists should mind their own business.
|
Steffie
Member
Reged: 04/11/02
Posts: 107
Loc: Southwest
|
|
P.S. I looked at those sample questions for the pharmacist test - looks like book-learning solely - not compounding. Glorified pill counters.....
|
SBELL
Newbie
Reged: 11/04/03
Posts: 35
|
|
Hi, I wonder how a person is red flaged,and how you can find out. Thanks Sbell
|
maria
Journeyman
Reged: 07/07/03
Posts: 92
Loc: nowhere
|
|
Jaketoo, of course 95% of the pharmacists are the ones you'd see counting to 30, aka the retail pharmacists. Why would you ever need to see a pharmacist of any other field? But retail pharmacy is a small portion of the field... it's just the portion that the public sees. BTW I never said that pharmacists were gods, I was responding to all the people who seem so sure they know more or could do a better job. I don't have a pharmacist in the family, but a friend... and I'm amazed/disgusted with some of the stories I hear. Most pharmacists would LOVE to give patients their pain meds just to get rid of them. They're truly not trying to be a pain or on a power trip, they don't have time for that. I wonder how much of the perceived "attitude" is actually in the patient's head? I was trying to educate some people, if it even helps a little, not specifically you... no hard feelings here, k?
Steffie, those are only a few questions. There are compounding questions as well as calculations, kinetics etc. involved. Nevermind, some people will never get it. This is my last post on this thread.
|
Fiver
Member
Reged: 10/02/03
Posts: 104
Loc: Michigan
|
|
Well, heck. I'm gonna step out and give two thumbs up to my pharmacist (who also happens to work in a national chain!) He never bats an eye if I bring a refill in early, always asks how I'm feeling and sometimes offers bits of advice on how to cope with my pain. And, get this -- last month I brought in a script from my doc for #120 Percocet 10/650. He only had forty of them in stock, and told me I could come back in two days for the rest OR I could take #240 5/325 instead, which would also save me almost a hundred dollars. (And there's a nice tip for those of you who get scripted percs 10/650.) He then suggested I tell my doc to prescribe twice as many of the fives next time since I don't have insurance. After I picked up my prescription I went across the street to the pizza place and had them send two large pepperoni pizzas to the pharmacy.
You know, people are people. There are gonna be jerks in every walk of life, and there are also going to be gems. I guess it's just the luck of the draw.
|
Steffie
Member
Reged: 04/11/02
Posts: 107
Loc: Southwest
|
|
Maria,you're right. Maybe what I said earlier was taken a little out of context. Per the "Omibus Act of 1990" pharmacists must be extra careful - bat an eyelash wrong and someone will sue you. Like I said, I work in the legal field and I don't know if any of you guys have heard of the "Baycor" litigations? Not only is Bayer being sued, but the prescribing doctors, the pharmacists, the pharmacies, and even the reps!! The only ones I could see at fault would be Bayer & the FDA for not enough testing! But anyway, I too use an "almost" national chain (a Western food chain actually) pharmacy and the pharmacist couldn't be better. While they do NOT allow ANY early refill,if I'm out of a med and I don't have a written prescription yet, he will "give" me a couple pills to tide me over. Best advice I've seen on the board is to be completely honest with the docs and if a pharmacist gives you a "look", screw 'em - if the doc says you should have a certain med, then so be it!!!
|
night_shade
Threadhead
Reged: 08/26/03
Posts: 907
Loc: The State of Hockey
|
|
ANother thread that morphed into something completely different than the original post. Not knocking anybody, just saying that this one is dead in the water about now. Please, somebody, pop the corpse and let it sink!
--------------------
Never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.
|
kajun0418
Stranger
Reged: 06/09/03
Posts: 6
Loc: new orleans, la
|
|
My sister is a PA at a pharmacy that "specializes" in pain meds, she said by law, (at least here in Louisiana) you can refill a script after the patient has used up 70% of their meds, however, one of the pharmacists who works there, won't refill the scripts, even one day early, cause it makes her mad,how much pain meds these pain specialist will rx for their patients, and then you see these "pain" patients walk out of the pharmacy, go into the parking lot, and sell, in broad daylight, their pills. When my sister leaves work at night, she always walks looking down, as she finds money on the ground. (LOL) It's people like these, that give the rest of us with legitimate problems a bad name, and makes the pharmacists suspicious of everyone. But I do think this particular pharmacist needs to find a new pharmacy, and not one who specializes in this type of meds, because I'm sure not all patients are dealers, and most of them deserve to be treated with compassion, not ignorance.
--------------------
kajun
|
gottadoit
Enthusiast
Reged: 10/21/03
Posts: 269
|
|
If the pharmacist is actually witnessing a drug deal in the parking lot (on a regular basis no less!) why doesn't she call the police?? Instead she is taking out her frustration on the legit pain patients that are truly in need?
|
catmom
Board Addict
Reged: 06/20/03
Posts: 320
Loc: Midwest
|
|
"Pop the corpse & let it sink..." OMG where DO DB members get these turns of phrase?!  I have been loving the phrase "taking a dirt nap" for days in referece to dying. Now I have to make a mental note of THIS fabulous phrase & gotta work it into a conversation somewhere!!! I love this site!!  Catmom
--------------------
If it's not immediate, it's not gratification.
|
catmom
Board Addict
Reged: 06/20/03
Posts: 320
Loc: Midwest
|
|
I really appreciate the attitude of your post, Fiver!  I am happy you had a good pharmacy experience. A disproportionate number of the folks at this site have had truly bad experiences & that's one of the reasons they are here.
--------------------
If it's not immediate, it's not gratification.
|
IMSUSCOT1
Threadhead
Reged: 10/23/02
Posts: 874
Loc: usa
|
|
your pharmacist sounds like a nice guy..but he is playing fast & loose with a schedule II script that the DEA allows NO SUCH leeway on! A schedule II CANNOT be filled with an alternate dosage form, even if it evens out the total dosage written for & technically, they can't fill a partial...although my own Pharmacy will give me 10 & have me come back if their out of stock...but this pharmacist needs to read up on the SEVERE limitations on schedult II scripting...as he's taking risks that threaten his livelyhood & ability to continue in his chosen profession....
|
IMSUSCOT1
Threadhead
Reged: 10/23/02
Posts: 874
Loc: usa
|
|
Quote:
I work in the medical field, and we are to remain closed lipped about everything. Medical records are double locked. Traveling files I take in the field are double locked in my car. Perhaps I'm just over-shadowing work here. However, I do take two types of pain meds. One script for long acting pain and another for break-through pain. There's no pharmacist in the world that is going to tell me I can't have 2 different pain meds prescribed for me. Now, if I went and broke my leg, I may need something stronger for acute pain, as I suffer from chronic pain. I don't think I would be breaking the law to receive something for acute pain, nor do I think the pharmacist has a right to call my pain doc and tell him/her that I have scripts from another doc. I would tell any ER doc what I was taking and my pharmacist as well. Most of us working in the medical field live, eat, breath, and gag HIPAA because we live with this little nightmare of a law everyday. 
zoe
this is late in posting a reply...but I'm the HIPAA Security & Privacy officer at our practice & clearly you've missed the EXCEPTIONS to whom they can disclose info to ....so go back & read these exceptions again....there's no violation here & THEY CAN & SHOULD inform another physician calling in a script for a narcotic, particularly one with an APAP combo that you're already taking a narcotic/or especially a long acting & short acting combo.....
So...it's up to the doc to decide whether or not he chooses to go ahead & prescribe a different narcotic, different strength or dosage....but the pharmacist is violating good medical practice by NOT informing him of other meds in the same class/group/modality of action....
We will not disclose information about pharmaceutical services rendered to you to third parties without your consent, EXCEPT TO THE FOLLOWING PERSONS
(a) the prescribing practitioner or a pharmacist or another prescribing practitioner presently treating you when deemed medically appropriate;
(b) a nurse who is acting as an agent for a prescribing practitioner that is presently treating you or a nurse providing care to you in a hospital;
(c) third party payors who pay claims for pharmaceutical services rendered to you or who have a formal agreement or contract to audit any records or information in connection with such claims;
(d) any governmental agency with statutory authority to review or obtain such information;
(e) any individual, the state or federal government or any agency thereof or court pursuant to a subpoena; and
(f) any individual, corporation, partnership or other legal entity which has a written agreement with the pharmacy to access the pharmacy’s database provided the information accessed is limited to data which does not identify specific individuals.
Edited by IMSUSCOT1 (01/01/04 06:01 AM)
|
Caveman6666
Enthusiast
Reged: 01/15/03
Posts: 218
Loc: Earth
|
|
Quote:
We will not disclose information about pharmaceutical services rendered to you to third parties without your consent, EXCEPT TO THE FOLLOWING PERSONS
(a) the prescribing practitioner or a pharmacist or another prescribing practitioner presently treating you when deemed medically appropriate;
(b) a nurse who is acting as an agent for a prescribing practitioner that is presently treating you or a nurse providing care to you in a hospital;
(c) third party payors who pay claims for pharmaceutical services rendered to you or who have a formal agreement or contract to audit any records or information in connection with such claims;
(d) any governmental agency with statutory authority to review or obtain such information;
(e) any individual, the state or federal government or any agency thereof or court pursuant to a subpoena; and
(f) any individual, corporation, partnership or other legal entity which has a written agreement with the pharmacy to access the pharmacy’s database provided the information accessed is limited to data which does not identify specific individuals.
So basically, they can release your information to Best if kept off the board near anyone.
It ought to be known as the anti- privacy act. 
|
IMSUSCOT1
Threadhead
Reged: 10/23/02
Posts: 874
Loc: usa
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
We will not disclose information about pharmaceutical services rendered to you to third parties without your consent, EXCEPT TO THE FOLLOWING PERSONS
(a) the prescribing practitioner or a pharmacist or another prescribing practitioner presently treating you when deemed medically appropriate;
(b) a nurse who is acting as an agent for a prescribing practitioner that is presently treating you or a nurse providing care to you in a hospital;
(c) third party payors who pay claims for pharmaceutical services rendered to you or who have a formal agreement or contract to audit any records or information in connection with such claims;
(d) any governmental agency with statutory authority to review or obtain such information;
(e) any individual, the state or federal government or any agency thereof or court pursuant to a subpoena; and
(f) any individual, corporation, partnership or other legal entity which has a written agreement with the pharmacy to access the pharmacy’s database provided the information accessed is limited to data which does not identify specific individuals.
So basically, they can release your information to Best if kept off the board near anyone.
It ought to be known as the anti- privacy act.
which of these individuals do you disagree with having access to the information?
any doc prescribing you medication, NEEDS to be informed of medications your already taking that will interact/interfere with or compound side effects of a med doc #2 is prescribing
a nurse calling in a script for a doc, same rule applies
a third party payor is just your insurance company...if you don't want them to know, DON'T give out your insurance info
Government agencies have a right to the info as prescribed by law..i.e. via subpoena
and last group is for companies who access info re drugs prescribed w/o the personal identifying info attached...
REALLY, where is the problem here?
|
IMSUSCOT1
Threadhead
Reged: 10/23/02
Posts: 874
Loc: usa
|
|
Book learning like anatomy & physiology, pathophysiology, abnormal phsychology....like that? GIve me a break....when you get your degree & can pass the boards, AFTER taking these & MANY other courses, then call them glorified pill counters...you don't even have the BASE knowledge to understand what it is they know that you DON'T!!!!!!
|
Caveman6666
Enthusiast
Reged: 01/15/03
Posts: 218
Loc: Earth
|
|
Quote:
which of these individuals do you disagree with having access to the information?
All of them. I prefer to make my own disclosures to whom I see fit.
Quote:
REALLY, where is the problem here?
Our "free" country is rapidly becoming anything but. And this so-called "privacy act" is a shining example of that.
|
IMSUSCOT1
Threadhead
Reged: 10/23/02
Posts: 874
Loc: usa
|
|
Many of the current pracitices you object to, congress has merely made you aware of, by law. These practices have been in place for decades....and are in place because of issues in patient saftey & good patient care. Many of the guidelines that licensed medical practioners work with are structured in the licensure arrangement itself...and is tied to the standards of care in place at the given time.
For as far back as I can remember, and that's 20 years, notification to a prescribing physican, of any medication that has any potential to interact with the newly prescribed medication has been a standard of care that if not followed, would result in deaths & untoward outcomes for millions of patient's each year. This is a MEDICAL requirement....has nothing to do with the government wanting to know what your taking....
To fail to do so would be unethical by the pharmacist, & would surely result in the loss of his/her license to practice.
You've only just been officially notified, therefore you mistakenly believe this is a "new" law that you object to.
It's medically prudent practice & will continue & rightly so forever, amen.
And if you don't want your third party payor (read insurance company, or in the case of self funded plans, employers) to have any information about the meds you're taking, then don't bill your insurance company. They too have medical experts in place to review care & ensure it's provided & is in keeping with the standards of care in place. So you have control over that & this too has been in place as long as third party payors have been in existance, again, they're just now required to INFORM you of it.
The last category is statistical data only & all personally identifying information is deleted, so they have numbers, not attached to any name.
This isn't new, it's the way business has always been done, vis a vie dispensing of medication, for literally decades.
You stil haven't answered my question as to why you believe a physician shouldn't be informed of a patient's current medication(s) that have the potential to interact with a new med 2nd physician is prescirbing. To do otherwise constitutes malpractice, plain & simple.....
|
IMSUSCOT1
Threadhead
Reged: 10/23/02
Posts: 874
Loc: usa
|
|
They are notifying you BECAUSE OF THE LAW...it's called HIPAA & they are following it to the letter.....
|
IMSUSCOT1
Threadhead
Reged: 10/23/02
Posts: 874
Loc: usa
|
|
AGAIN you need to READ the privacy practices the pharmacy follows. They did NOT disclose info in violation of HIPAA, but in accordance WITH HIPAA....it states THEY WILL inform physicians or nurses calling on behlaf of physicians, of any medication that warrants such notification to prevent possible interactions....
You have to understand the act that was passed, and understand the privacy practices of the given institution you're dealing with....go back, read it one more time...THERE IS NO VIOLATION HERE
|
Caveman6666
Enthusiast
Reged: 01/15/03
Posts: 218
Loc: Earth
|
|
Quote:
You stil haven't answered my question as to why you believe a physician shouldn't be informed of a patient's current medication(s) that have the potential to interact with a new med 2nd physician is prescirbing. To do otherwise constitutes malpractice, plain & simple.....
I didn't say shouldn't. I said I'd prefer to make my own disclosures. Private information ought to be kept just that; private, unless the individual chooses to release it.
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit 
Reply 
Quote 
