What happens to prescription docket after pharmacist has filled it?

eggerb

General interest and relevant to a recent experience ...

I am wondering what happens to the prescription docket that a doctor has signed after the pharmacist has filled it? Does the pharmacist just shred them or log them onto some system or send them somewhere/back to the doctor?

I've seen them piling them up on their paper spikes and often wondered what happened to them afterwards.

On Monday, my wife was prescribed some antibiotics and asked the doctor to put an inhaler she uses for asthma on the docket as well. When I brought it to be filled, I could have sworn that it only had the antibiotics on it. When I rang the surgery today, the receptionist said it had both medicines on it.

Now, it isn't a big deal, the doctor will write a prescription for the inhaler. I'm just wondering will the pharmacist still have the docket and what, in general, happens to the dockets after they are filled?

pharmacist

they are supposed to be kept on file.

eggerb

pharmacist wrote: »

they are supposed to be kept on file.

Cheers - thanks pharmacist. So, the pharmacist should still have it. Just checking in case it was sent back to the doctor or whatever! Thinking about it, that would be a lot of paper processing for pharmacists and doctors.

smtdos

eggerb wrote: »

I'm just wondering will the pharmacist still have the docket and what, in general, happens to the dockets after they are filled?

All non-repeatable prescriptions must be kept on site at the pharmacy for 2 years from the date of dispensing. After that, the are shredded.

Prescriptions dispensed in the current month should be at hand in most pharmacies. Further back than that, they would have to be rooted out for you!

locum-motion

smtdos wrote: »

All non-repeatable prescriptions must be kept on site at the pharmacy for 2 years from the date of dispensing. After that, the are shredded...

And repeatable ones can be given back to the patient, or else can be filed until needed again. Then when the repeats are used up (or when the prescription is six months old) it gets filed away with the others mentioned above.

Sauve

Just to add to the comments above, I'm not sure if it's regulation yet or if it's on the way, but in our pharmacy we've started photocopying and filing any private prescriptions that we return to patients after dispensing.
Just so we have a record incase of inspection/enquiry or if the patient should happen to lose it and come back for a repeat dispensing.

locum-motion

It's not regulation, nor have I heard of any plans to bring in such a regulation.

As regards an inspection, the PSI inspectors have no right to expect you to be able to produce a photocopy of a repeatable script, since there is no regulation that requires you to be able to do so.

And as regards repeating it: if you return a repeatable script to the patient, then the patient must bring it back to you when they wish to have the script repeated. You cannot legally supply a prescription only medicine on foot of a photocopy of a script, you have to have the actual script.

You should know that!

Delancey

I was fascinated to learn that prescriptions for humans must be kept on file for 2 years but prescriptions for animals must be kept for 5 years !! - apparently something to do with traceability of drugs in the food chain I believe.
Remember that in this country we don't have a personal identity card system unlike most continental countries but we do require all cattle to have their own identity papers - Ireland , ya gotta love it

opinion guy

Delancey wrote: »

apparently something to do with traceability of drugs in the food chain I believe.

I was momentarily outraged when I misread this as dogs in the food chain!:eek:

Sauve

locum-motion wrote: »

It's not regulation, nor have I heard of any plans to bring in such a regulation.

As regards an inspection, the PSI inspectors have no right to expect you to be able to produce a photocopy of a repeatable script, since there is no regulation that requires you to be able to do so.

And as regards repeating it: if you return a repeatable script to the patient, then the patient must bring it back to you when they wish to have the script repeated. You cannot legally supply a prescription only medicine on foot of a photocopy of a script, you have to have the actual script.

You should know that!

The last time we were inspected they asked for them. There were some that we didn't have and the inspectors were fine about it, but we subsequently took the decision to copy everything.

As regards the photocopy - I do know the regs regarding this don't worry, but that's not always how it happens. If they lose the script and need a repeat, we then have something to go on if we need to issue an emergency supply. Our pharmacists prefer to have some kind of record - for their own peace of mind if nothing else.

Delancey

opinion guy wrote: »

I was momentarily outraged when I misread this as dogs in the food chain!:eek:

Reminds me of the time I was in the butchers and asked him for a few dog bones to which he replied '' sorry , we don't sell dog here ''

locum-motion

Sauvignon82 wrote: »

The last time we were inspected they asked for them. There were some that we didn't have and the inspectors were fine about it, but we subsequently took the decision to copy everything.

This is the problem with the PSI as it was reconstituted by The Pharmacy Act 2007; they regulate according to what they think the law should say, not according to what it actually says. I'm in the lucky and possibly unique position of never having met an inspector (in the course of their duties) in 15 years of practice, but if an inspector asked me to produce a photocopy of a repeatable prescription that had been returned to the patient, I would ask them to point out the section of the Medicinal Products (Prescription and Control of Supply) Regulations that says I have to keep such a copy. There isn't such a section.

Sauvignon82 wrote: »

As regards the photocopy - I do know the regs regarding this don't worry, but that's not always how it happens. If they lose the script and need a repeat, we then have something to go on if we need to issue an emergency supply. Our pharmacists prefer to have some kind of record - for their own peace of mind if nothing else.

I agree it could be a handy bit of evidence to allow you to do an emergency supply, but that's all it is It has no other legal standing. Same as a fax. A photocopy is not a prescription.