CVS- Faxing 'On Hold' Prescriptions

[josh6718]

So it seems with CVS being all about workflow, efficiency, and doing more with less- why they wouldn't have developed a way to pull an 'on-hold' prescription (or at least e-rx) to another CVS?

Instead the 'norm' goes something like this: technician calls store and waits on hold. Other technician has to print the hardcopy, look up store fax number, then fax it, and the other store type in again.

I also dislike it because:

1. I have seen several times where the store simply printed the hardcopy but never deleted the prescription (even more troublesome when its a controlled substance)

2. The RX origin code is a 'faxed prescription' when its received (even if the original was an e-rx) which results in failing the monthly RX Validation as faxed prescriptions are required to have a physicians signature.

Anyone else have any thoughts on this?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[owlegrad]

You are forgetting the best part - when the other store DOES delete the script but you never receive it, then you call the store back and no one knows what you are talking about! Pure awesomeness.

 

[maria1oh]

In ohio the board came down on cvs for this. Techs should not be transferring. Instead it is done between two pharmacists or interns giving a verbal of the hard copy. Then instead of deleting the original you edit the sig code to say "transfered out to pharmacy xxx-xxxx)" and try to document rph name in sig code as well.

 

[Sine Cura]

It's not a good idea to delete outright transferred on-hold scripts for various reasons, including loss of profile integrity (missing prescription and assigned Rx number - you don't just delete transferred-out scripts from a profile that undergo the correct transfer process, so why would you do the same for on-hold Rx? The case of controlled substances is addressed below), no placeholder to annotate information on receiving pharmacy (as limited as that is in RxConnect), what happens if the other pharmacy never received it... and in the event (however unlikely) that an inspector looks at a transfer of an on-hold prescription, when the inspector shows up at the origin pharmacy, how do you explain the missing Rx?

Transferring never-filled controlled substance prescriptions... something not really permissible.

"The transfer of original prescription information for a controlled substance listed in Schedule III, IV, or V for the purpose of refill dispensing is permissible between pharmacies on a one-time basis only." http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/1306/1306_25.htm

(k) The term refilling prescriptions for controlled substances in Schedule III, IV, or V:
(1) Means the dispensing of a controlled substance in Schedule III, IV, or V in accordance with refill instructions issued by a practitioner as part of a valid prescription..." http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr/cfr/1300/1300_04.htm

In other words it's not "refill dispensing" if the first fill is at the destination pharmacy.

As for Rx validation I have seen auditors flag internal transfers as non-compliant due to absence of a signature (not sure if this is an issue anymore) so the solution for most RXM is to cheat validation if these fringe cases show up or literally treat every faxed internal transfer as a verbal (transcribe it on the transfer pad; better to have the e-script or scan of original Rx anyway versus trusting someone over the phone).

 

[rxkrafted]

they recently implemented something for internal transferring of "on-hold" prescriptions at CVS. There is a module on it so you can just transfer electronically now. Not sure when the systems will update and go live though

 

[pinfamy]

In new york your technically not suppose to transfer new scripts... only refills... some pharamcist in new york dont fax on holds or take in on holds.

 

[josh6718]

they recently implemented something for internal transferring of "on-hold" prescriptions at CVS. There is a module on it so you can just transfer electronically now. Not sure when the systems will update and go live though

That module (i'm assuming you are referring to the"Easy Transfer") says that: "any prescriptions that are in-process, on-hold, or in the waiting bin are not eligible to be transferred out."

Basically from what I understand, it really only allows one CVS to initiate a request to another CVS to transfer a prescription that had already been previously filled. For example a store in New York sends a request to a Florida CVS for that store to pull a prescription through.

 

[Corpseman]

You cant just pull scripts to fill at your CVS that were previously filled at a different CVS?

 

[owlegrad]

You cant just pull scripts to fill at your CVS that were previously filled at a different CVS?

Not if they are "On Hold" - most common example is a script that was typed but not filled.

 

[Corpseman]

Not if they are "On Hold" - most common example is a script that was typed but not filled.

Interesting, I figured that would be a must-have at a large chain.

 

[owlegrad]

Interesting, I figured that would be a must-have at a large chain.

It should be.

 

[rxkrafted]

That module (i'm assuming you are referring to the"Easy Transfer") says that: "any prescriptions that are in-process, on-hold, or in the waiting bin are not eligible to be transferred out."

Basically from what I understand, it really only allows one CVS to initiate a request to another CVS to transfer a prescription that had already been previously filled. For example a store in New York sends a request to a Florida CVS for that store to pull a prescription through.

Oh, your right. I wonder what the point of that module was for then? No point in going through the way that was shown in the module when you can just simply fill through the patient's profile lol

 

[pillpharmer14]

This thread brings back terrible memories of explaining to people how their RX vanished into thin air.

 

[owlegrad]

Oh, your right. I wonder what the point of that module was for then? No point in going through the way that was shown in the module when you can just simply fill through the patient's profile lol

The point is the sending store can initiate the transfer.

 

[Deja]

fax and delete? why don't you guys just treat the other CVS as a random pharmacy and transfer the prescription as you would if a walgreens calls for a copy for on hold prescription?

 

[maria1oh]

fax and delete? why don't you guys just treat the other CVS as a random pharmacy and transfer the prescription as you would if a walgreens calls for a copy for on hold prescription?

The problem is cvs can not transfer on hold prescriptions to any pharmacy. Try typing in the rx number in the TO (transfer out) and it will say not eligible for transfer. They just fax and delete out and document on hard copy where it was transferred to. Or better way is to keep the rx in the system but edit the sig code saying it was transferred out.

 

[chiu100]

agree with Sine Cura, you can't transfer a rx that was on hold. by law, you can transfer the refills and if it was never filled, you can't transfer it. I've been in situations like that and I gave the rx info to the other RPH on the phone and told her/him that needs to be verified by a doc, treating it as a new verbal rx. They will have to explain to the doc why patient needs another rx and by law pharmacies can't transfer on hold rx. You may get chewed up by the doc, but that's our life...

 

[owlegrad]

I feel like some pharmacists make it a point to make their lives even more miserable than is unavoidable.

 

[ChalupaBatman86]

agree with Sine Cura, you can't transfer a rx that was on hold. by law, you can transfer the refills and if it was never filled, you can't transfer it. I've been in situations like that and I gave the rx info to the other RPH on the phone and told her/him that needs to be verified by a doc, treating it as a new verbal rx. They will have to explain to the doc why patient needs another rx and by law pharmacies can't transfer on hold rx. You may get chewed up by the doc, but that's our life...

Which state's laws are you referencing since federal law does not address transfers of legend drugs at all?

 

[Deja]

wait can you transfer on hold (never filled) control meds in cali? a pharmacist told me you can't but i sworn people did it all the time lol

 

[txpharmguy]

Many moons ago WAG had a "held" drawer, where prescriptions that were not to be filled were to be put. If a new rx was filled and later returned to stock, it was considered "stored". In other words, it had been reviewed by a pharmacist at one point. If you had a "held" rx to fill, you had to go pull hardcopy from "held" drawer, scan it in an process. (This was still when we had rx imaging). Naturally, this caused unnecessary work. Instead of putting an rx on "hold", we would go thru the motions of "filling" rx and then storing rx. Well, corporate got wise and any rx that was to be "saved" (whether it be refill too soon, whatever) they put in an enhancement that the rx would be stored right after data verification.

 

[ldiot]

In ohio the board came down on cvs for this. Techs should not be transferring. Instead it is done between two pharmacists or interns giving a verbal of the hard copy. Then instead of deleting the original you edit the sig code to say "transfered out to pharmacy xxx-xxxx)" and try to document rph name in sig code as well.

What do you do if the other store deleted the script altogether as opposed to leaving it on hold and editing the sig? Rewrite it as a phone-in?

In PA right now and some stores fax the script and delete it so I have no Rx number and they have no record of it. Most stores seem to delete them and some stores just leave it on hold and do nothing, not even document it in the sig so now the patient has 2 scripts...