Cvs two step verification process

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Still very new to 2-step and I have some huge gripes with it. My chief problem right now is the stuff on hold in QV: do I have to read them to make sure they're correct, or can I auto-verify them without reading them? We have easily 100 on-holds during the course of the day, perhaps more. If I verify an on-hold, it goes straight to patient profile, but I'm concerned that when someone processes it from the profile, the computer thinks I "verified" it already and sends it straight to production. Thus, the only thing the pharmacist will be verifying after that terrifying scenario happens is that the correct pill is in the correct bottle.

I have tested this a couple times and it appears anything On-hold in the patient profile that is processed will go straight to QV for image verification, which is good, upon which it goes to QP after that. Verifying an on-hold in QV also doesn't ask you to check for DUR, so theoretically the computer should not mistake it for a true verification (although who the heck knows because now when you verify some real live prescriptions the computer skips DUR if there are none).

Lastly, there is nothing stopping them from updating the computer to making it so that verifying an on-hold is like verifying a real live prescription. This can happen overnight without anyone notifying us.
Members don't see this ad.
 
GP7777 said:
Still very new to 2-step and I have some huge gripes with it. My chief problem right now is the stuff on hold in QV: do I have to read them to make sure they're correct, or can I auto-verify them without reading them? We have easily 100 on-holds during the course of the day, perhaps more. If I verify an on-hold, it goes straight to patient profile, but I'm concerned that when someone processes it from the profile, the computer thinks I "verified" it already and sends it straight to production. Thus, the only thing the pharmacist will be verifying after that terrifying scenario happens is that the correct pill is in the correct bottle.

I have tested this a couple times and it appears anything On-hold in the patient profile that is processed will go straight to QV for image verification, which is good, upon which it goes to QP after that. Verifying an on-hold in QV also doesn't ask you to check for DUR, so theoretically the computer should not mistake it for a true verification (although who the heck knows because now when you verify some real live prescriptions the computer skips DUR if there are none).

Lastly, there is nothing stopping them from updating the computer to making it so that verifying an on-hold is like verifying a real live prescription. This can happen overnight without anyone notifying us.
Click to expand...

If you verify an on-hold script that is wrong and it gets filled or transferred out incorrectly as a result...then the misfill is on you.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Additionally, if you’re only verifying data entry and no DUR or product verification, how long can that take? Say it takes 10 seconds per script to match name, DOB, drug, sig, quantity, and refills. You’re looking at ~17 minutes per day to correctly verify 100 on hold scripts. Maybe 2-3 of those are illegible or require clarification, but still not horrible.
 
Last edited:
Rouelle said:
Additionally, if you’re only verifying data entry and no DUR or product verification, how long can that take? Say it takes 10 seconds per script to match name, DOB, drug, sig, quantity, and refills. You’re looking at ~17 minutes per day to correctly verify 100 on hold scripts. Maybe 2-3 of those are illegible or require clarification, but still not horrible.
Click to expand...

Takes you 10 seconds, takes everyone an average of 10 seconds, or you think it should take everyone just 10 seconds? Is there a refractory period involved? Do pharmacists just smoothly and immediately drift from one thing to another? What about priortization... are those 10 seconds competing with a 10 second 10 frame already spoken for?

It’s easy to look at things in a vacuum but looking at 150 tasks in a vacuum doesn’t equal the whole. There’s variances both ways. Multitasking and/or “rest”. Rest = not doing something defined in the 150 tasks. May include having to resolve an issue with a technician complaining about their work schedule.

Don’t be like them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
PharFromNormal said:
Takes you 10 seconds, takes everyone an average of 10 seconds, or you think it should take everyone just 10 seconds? Is there a refractory period involved? Do pharmacists just smoothly and immediately drift from one thing to another? What about priortization... are those 10 seconds competing with a 10 second 10 frame already spoken for?

It’s easy to look at things in a vacuum but looking at 150 tasks in a vacuum doesn’t equal the whole. There’s variances both ways. Multitasking and/or “rest”. Rest = not doing something defined in the 150 tasks. May include having to resolve an issue with a technician complaining about their work schedule.

Don’t be like them.
Click to expand...

Just ball parking a number. Maybe 5, maybe 20. It seems manageable over the course of a day. Going for the big picture here: one should actually verify them.
 
Would have to agree about the timing; constantly having to drop everything I'm doing, and waste time searching for an Rx in QV (often just typing in the Rx # in the sea of on-holds yet to be verified due to constant interruptions). On paper, it seems like it would only take 10 seconds, but in reality, more like 30 seconds because of constantly changing priorities (patient shows up or calls about a script, etc.). Multi-tasking is NOT efficient

No one besides night RPh verify on-holds (everyone is under the impression they don't count towards metrics) but this just creates more background noise to have to filter out
 
Rouelle said:
Just ball parking a number. Maybe 5, maybe 20. It seems manageable over the course of a day. Going for the big picture here: one should actually verify them.
Click to expand...

Agreed on your big picture but be careful when trying to just casually assign a time like it’s no big deal. Pharmacists should actually verify them and take it seriously thus the proper amount of time and labor should be allocated to such activity. Quick math like that could be done on everything we could think of at the average rate and I bet you’ll get a very very low amount of time needed from a rph. The problem is you’ll never account for everything. I’m sure if a lowballed assumption is provided to the excel gurus they’ll gladly use it. I can see them now... “oh someone actually thinks it’s only 5... let’s use that and manage to it. If they can’t get to that then they are hurting themselves and aren’t being efficient. 5 is reasonable, we’ve seen Rouelle do one in only 3! We are being conservative! The pharmacists would never under report how long it takes!”
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Rouelle said:
If you verify an on-hold script that is wrong and it gets filled or transferred out incorrectly as a result...then the misfill is on you.
Click to expand...

When on hold script gets transferred out, other pharmacy gets to see actual image of rx not transferred information like refill transfer. Tried and tested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Sometimes the computer is so slow it takes more than 10 seconds to load
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Low staffing levels notwithstanding, I don't get the big deal about verifying on-hold Rx. If it's taken off hold, can't you see the Rx image again? Also, wouldn't you want to clear out data verification in the order in which things are received just to keep it clean. Leaving it for other people is what a bad WM pharmacist would do.
 
rickyroxy said:
When on hold script gets transferred out, other pharmacy gets to see actual image of rx not transferred information like refill transfer. Tried and tested.
Click to expand...

This was true for a period of time. Now however it will print out the original image for filing but at QV you see the CVS transfer image. To see the original you have to type “V”
 
Last edited:
nextyearrx said:
They started to build new kind of stores with pharmacy, minute clinic, dental clinic (kind of all in one spot)
Click to expand...

Yes, i am a WM manager, They have 2 pilot stores now. The model is built in the parking lot of the actual store (soon to become fulfillment centers) , and contains different doctors, dentists, radiology....etc. and yes, pharmacy. Like a one stop shop. The idea is they will also create their own PBM and cut out Medicare Part D and their ridiculous adherence based reimbursement. They want to reduce healthcare costs and put everything in one spot, with less billing. What i mean is , you ever get an X-ray or cat scan? and get like 7 bills? one guy reads it, one guy farts on it......etc. they want to consolidate healthcare and focus on that. They expect in 10 years that healthcare will be 2.5 times bigger than the retail sector. Then again, this is all coming from my DM , so who knows who is being lied to. I do see all sorts of programs being put in place to hold people "accountable" for all sorts of stuff right from jump street in the new fiscal year. They are moving very quickly in a not so people friendly direction to stay alive. the current goal is to have 10 - 30 of these "health pavilions" set up by april-->july, then if all goes well by 5 years they will canvas the nation with them. The biggest investment EVER in wal mart history since super centers or grocery. Don't Blink because this is happening VERY quick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Remote verification (sharing) is coming soon for cvs pharmacists!!
 
sozetone said:
Yes, i am a WM manager, They have 2 pilot stores now. The model is built in the parking lot of the actual store (soon to become fulfillment centers) , and contains different doctors, dentists, radiology....etc. and yes, pharmacy. Like a one stop shop. The idea is they will also create their own PBM and cut out Medicare Part D and their ridiculous adherence based reimbursement. They want to reduce healthcare costs and put everything in one spot, with less billing. What i mean is , you ever get an X-ray or cat scan? and get like 7 bills? one guy reads it, one guy farts on it......etc. they want to consolidate healthcare and focus on that. They expect in 10 years that healthcare will be 2.5 times bigger than the retail sector. Then again, this is all coming from my DM , so who knows who is being lied to. I do see all sorts of programs being put in place to hold people "accountable" for all sorts of stuff right from jump street in the new fiscal year. They are moving very quickly in a not so people friendly direction to stay alive. the current goal is to have 10 - 30 of these "health pavilions" set up by april-->july, then if all goes well by 5 years they will canvas the nation with them. The biggest investment EVER in wal mart history since super centers or grocery. Don't Blink because this is happening VERY quick.
Click to expand...
Color me inspired lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Remote verify has also been at rite aid for past two years. It is nice for busy stores but extra work for slower stores.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

P
CVS Walkout
2
Replies
73
Views
6K
knight on horse
knight on horse
P
Immunizing pharmacist CVS
Replies
0
Views
545
pharmdeep
P
Mhdfdleon
Termination at CVS
Replies
41
Views
3K
WorthlessOxygen
WorthlessOxygen
P
CVS Layoffs
Replies
5
Views
2K
RxPreceptor
RxPreceptor
Lexington2012
  • Locked
LA Times says CVS is causing drug errors because of understaffing.
Replies
31
Views
3K
owlegrad
owlegrad
Top