If a failed e-script shows up in the fax is it still valid?

[trailerpark]

For Walmart's computer system if an e-script fails it just winds up in our fax que. Someone told me it's because the ndc picked on the doctors end doesn't match an ndc in our system so it will just show up as a fax instead. In the fax box it obviously doesn't have a written signature on it, but says electronically entered by so and so nurse and authorized by so and so Doctor. I worked with a pharmacist who sent all these to resolution and called the DR to get a verbal approval since technically a fax is suppose to have a doctors actual signature on it. To me it just seemed like a waste of time and my store would just send it to input and fill it.

What do you guys think?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ldiot]

As long as it says the origin is eScript I don't really see a problem. I know at CVS it greys out the option to pick eScript as the origin if you are not generating the script from an eScribe so if you accidently delete the script and want to retype it from the printed image you are forced to select fax. I see people do it but not for CIIs. I've also made changes to eScripts, documented, and rescanned the image but I think it this case it retains eScript as the origin, thought if I were to delete the origional script and start over I would not be able to select eScribe. At the end of the day I wouldn't call to get verbals unless it's a controlled substance, you'd just be making your life harder.

 

[Sine Cura]

If I ever get in trouble for non-controls I quit this "profession."

 

[doublehh03]

If c3-5, call and verify.

If c2, nope.

If non-controls, fill.

 

[trailerpark]

This pharmacist tried telling me at other stores they have a huge pile going and tell the patients we have to call... I felt like it was BS


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[trailerpark]

Most doctor offices around here fax controls so this pharmacist is putting all non controls in resolution like inhalers and maintenance meds and telling the patient the script sent is not valid. She said my manager is breaking the law and just wanted to warn me in case the board finds out...


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[Sine Cura]

These pharmacists are ding-dongs because you can now use the annotation function on faxes. "Verified Rx with Bob at the clinic."

Walmart breaks the law every ****ing day with the drop-off window. Who gives a ****

 

[trailerpark]

What's wrong with drop off?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[Sine Cura]

Telling people waiting for counseling to step back to maintain adequate distance and not playing voicemails on speakerphone are both considered "reasonable" efforts to prevent incidental disclosures, but the very design of a Walmart pharmacy, at least one where both drop off windows are immediately adjacent to each other, makes it all but impossible to avoid incidental disclosures unless you forbid a second customer to come up

 

[Old Timer]

There are several issues to consider. First if this is for a controlled substance it is invalid for two reasons. First the order has been changed and that is not permitted:

§1311.170 Transmission requirements.

(b) The electronic prescription application may print a prescription that has been transmitted only if an intermediary or the designated pharmacy notifies a practitioner that an electronic prescription was not successfully delivered to the designated pharmacy. If this occurs, the electronic prescription application may print the prescription for the practitioner's manual signature. The printed prescription must include information noting that the prescription was originally transmitted electronically to [name of the specific pharmacy] on [date/time] and that transmission failed.

(f) An electronic prescription must be transmitted from the practitioner to the pharmacy in its electronic form. At no time may an intermediary convert an electronic prescription to another form ( e.g., facsimile) for transmission.

Next if it is not completely electronic, computer to computer it will need a manual signature. If you get a fax for a Controlled substance with the an electronic signature you will need a verbal:

(d) A practitioner may sign a paper prescription in the same manner as he would sign a check or legal document (e.g., J.H. Smith or John H. Smith). Where an oral order is not permitted, paper prescriptions shall be written with ink or indelible pencil, typewriter, or printed on a computer printer and shall be manually signed by the practitioner. A computer-generated prescription that is printed out or faxed by the practitioner must be manually signed.

For non controlled Rxs you would have to consult your state law to see what they consider a valid signature.

You will never ever ever get in trouble with the board unless you are doing something illegal on a grand scale. They don't come in and start looking through your rxs for things.

My only (but not yet realized) worry is that 3rd party auditors will be instructed to look at these technical violations and use them as an excuse to deny payment.

Know your state law, use good judgement and document what you do and you will be fine,.

 

[waiter]

calling on all controls

 

[RxPreceptor]

Are you able to still bring up/validate the electronic transmission data for these scripts?