Here come the pharmacists!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Taurus

Paul Revere of Medicine
20+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2004
Messages
3,220
Reaction score
670
The dumbing down of medicine in this country continues! First, they let the nurses practice medicine. Now they're letting the pharmacists too. Soon, the pharmacists will claim that treating and diagnosing ailments have been the province of pharmacy since the dawn of time. 🙄

http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2007-09-30-pharmacists-clinics_N.htm

Program gives pharmacists more clout in patient care

By Julie Appleby, USA TODAY
LOS ANGELES — On this city's Skid Row, where the down-on-their-luck come for food, shelter and a second chance, pharmacist Steven Chen bustles into a small examining room at a community clinic. He sits down next to Floyd McLucas, who has diabetes.

The two talk for more than 25 minutes about McLucas' medication, his diet and his recent blood sugar test results. Chen then suggests that McLucas, 58, a former truck driver who lives at a nearby charity mission, begin taking a drug to lower his cholesterol.

What's unusual about the encounter is not only the amount of time Chen is able to spend with McLucas, but also that Chen is a pharmacist with the authority to order lab tests, add or change medications, and otherwise help oversee patient care.

Both men are part of a program underway at a handful of federally funded health centers across the country, which aim to show that more directly involving pharmacists with patients can improve care and lower the cost of treating patients with chronic illnesses such as diabetes, asthma and heart disease.

During more than two years, patients with diabetes referred to the pharmacist program at the JWCH Medical Clinic at the Weingart Center on Los Angeles' Skid Row showed an average drop in blood sugar levels of 3.7 percentage points, a significant drop. Lowering blood sugar levels can help patients avoid some of the serious complications of diabetes. Blood pressure levels for the participants also fell significantly to near-normal range.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Los Angeles | University of Southern California | Health Resources and Services Administration

At another community clinic — The El Rio Community Health Center in Tucson — a group of diabetes patients referred to its pharmacist-overseen program had lower blood sugar levels after six months than counterparts getting standard care.

Results like those could help lead to more such efforts, as both government health programs and private insurers look for ways to control some of the most costly diseases. Preventing the complications of diabetes, including blindness, limb amputations, heart disease and stroke, could not only save lives, but also reduce hospitalization and other medical costs for insurers, program proponents say.

"This is the future of the practice of pharmacy," says Jimmy Mitchell, director of the office of pharmacy affairs at the federal Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), which granted start-up money for the Los Angeles program and 17 others.

Insurance roadblocks

More than 40 states allow such collaborations between pharmacists and doctors. But because many insurers don't directly pay pharmacists for patient care, such efforts are mainly found in programs run by a few state Medicaid agencies, as well as the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Indian Health Service and federally funded community clinics, which accept all patients regardless of whether they have insurance or money.

"We've been fortunate in that we've combined some profits from the pharmacy department to pay for this, and we have a foundation that seeks private donations to our program," says Tony Felix, pharmacy director for the El Rio center.

A big change came when Congress passed the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, which created a drug benefit for Medicare patients and said for the first time that pharmacists can be paid by insurers for counseling certain chronically ill Medicare patients who spend at least $4,000 a year on drugs.

"That was a turning point for community pharmacists to be recognized as health care providers," says Edith Rosato, senior vice president of pharmacy for the National Association of Chain Drug Stores.

The new rules come as retail pharmacies are expanding services — one way to boost foot traffic in their stores — to include more medical services, going beyond offering flu shots to offering other types of vaccinations or having specially trained pharmacists fit patients for medical equipment such as wheelchairs.

Still, most pharmacists in busy drugstores don't have the time or the space for longer disease-management sessions.

"Retail pharmacies are not usually conducive to this type of thing," says Bridget Eber, national practice leader for pharmacy benefits at benefits consulting firm Towers Perrin.

Humana, like some other insurers, runs disease-management programs for members with chronic conditions such as diabetes. Because the insurer does not have its own medical clinics, it has asked its network of 60,000 retail pharmacies if they would provide such counseling and get paid for it.

Independent pharmacies take lead

So far, just short of 7,000 pharmacies have signed on, many of them independent pharmacies rather than the large chain drugstores, says William Fleming, Humana's vice president of pharmacy. He attributes the low sign-up rate to a reluctance of pharmacies to set aside retail space for private counseling areas.

"In pharmacy school, we're all taught that you want to be more than a provider of pills," Fleming says. "Pharmacists want this opportunity, and it's in front of them now. It's up to the retail pharmacy community to seize this opportunity."

Rosato, who notes her group has worked closely with Humana, says it's also up to insurers to broaden the number of patients for whom counseling services are provided. As it stands, a retail pharmacy may see only a handful of patients who qualify under the restrictive Medicare rules, often not enough to justify making wholesale changes in store practices.

"We want to serve not just the chronically ill Medicare patients, but to expand the concept across the entire population," Rosato says.

To get employers and insurers to pay for such services, pharmacists must show that the programs improve care and lower costs. Rosato says that, initially, many such programs may show an increase in the amount spent by insurers on prescription drugs. But, over time, she says, savings are had through reduced hospitalizations and complications.

Treating homeless patients

Key to cost savings and improved health is to get chronically ill patients to consistently take their medications and follow other guidelines set by their doctors.

At the Weingart Center, pharmacist Chen spends a good deal of time discussing those issues with McLucas, who has followed the guidelines and is doing well, with low enough blood sugar readings that Chen tells him that he won't need to go on insulin.

Savings can come in other ways, too. The program helped the center increase the use of a low-cost government purchasing program and free programs offered by drugmakers, which resulted in about $1 million annually in savings.

On the day in mid-August that he met with McLucas, Chen had about 20 patients booked, but only about half showed up. That's just one of the challenges the medical staff faces in dealing with patients who are often homeless, between jobs or just out of jail.

The pharmacist program, run in conjunction with the University of Southern California School of Pharmacy, lets doctors refer some of their complicated, high-risk patients to the pharmacists, who generally have more time to spend with them. Chen left a medical practice in Beverly Hills to teach at USC and offer his time to the Weingart Center program.

Sometimes, the pharmacists even make home visits. Chen visited a diabetic patient who wasn't improving, despite having a good supply of insulin and clear instructions to store it in a refrigerator.

He arrived at the patient's address only to find a mostly empty lot. Confused, he went next door and asked about his patient. The neighbors said, " 'He lives right there,' " says Chen, who went back, poked his head inside a wood pile and saw a camper shell.

"In the middle of the lot was this refrigerator. It wasn't plugged in, and there was no door," says Chen. "There was the insulin, baking in the sun."

From then on, the patient had to come to the clinic more often because they could not give him extra supplies of insulin.

Not having a refrigerator or a kitchen is a problem for a lot of his diabetic patients, who must carefully control the sugars and carbohydrates they eat.

"I talk about eating fresh fruits and vegetables with my diabetic patients, and they said, 'We don't have refrigerators,' and they ask what they can store in their rooms that would be good for them," Chen says.

The average income for a clinic patient at the Los Angeles center is $2,500 a year, Chen says.

"It's been a humbling experience for me," Chen says. "We're all just two steps away from being these patients."

Gaining doctors' acceptance

The USC program began in 2002, when federal agency HRSA granted start-up money to the university's School of Pharmacy to expand pharmacy programs in three clinics, including the Weingart Center. After receiving additional money from private donors, USC has expanded the programs to eight clinics in Los Angeles.

The majority of the networks set up diabetes-management programs run by pharmacists, with most of the patients having multiple health problems, such as diabetes and high blood pressure, says a review of 18 networks completed in late 2004 by analysis firm Mathematica Policy Research.

The report called the results "striking" for patients in the program at least six months: One key reading of blood sugars dropped significantly, and the percentage of patients with optimal blood sugar levels nearly doubled to 37% from 18%. Even so, most of the results occurred in the first six months; patients generally leveled off but did not improve further.

Trouble finding money to continue programs led many of the networks to discontinue or cut back, with only 11 remaining at the time the report was completed.

Another challenge at some centers was getting doctors to agree to allow pharmacists an expanded role.

"Six of the 29 health centers with disease-management programs had little or no success generating physician support," the report says.

Chen said doctors initially were a bit skeptical about the role pharmacists would play in directly caring for patients.

"Most physicians didn't quite understand (at first)," Chen says. "They wondered, why are you changing the prescription or the dosage? At first, they wanted us to talk with them before making changes, so we did. After a while, the doctors said, 'We don't need you to talk with us.' "
 
Moving to Topics in Healthcare as this is not specific to allopathic medicine.
 
I don't see this as being all that different than PA's or NP's practicing in small, commercial urgent care clinics, like in the big box stores. God knows pharmacists make enough money and know a ton about drugs, they probably SHOULD be doing a lot more than they currently are.

What I'm not sure about is their educational background in disease processes and differential diagnosis. I wonder about how they would decide whether to start a pt on a certain medication. That seems a little fishy to me.

Seems like yet another example of where, there is such a huge demand for primary care, yet it costs so much, that people are looking for cheaper options, and NP's, PA's, even pharmacists might be able to provide some simple primary care.

In the realm of managing diabetes pt's, and other outpatient type stuff, it could be a help. But I'm skeptical of a pharmacist's ability to replicate a family physician role.

According to UW's pharmacy website, Pharm. D graduates only take 1 year of Anatomy and Physiology during their program. And if their residency is not focused on direct pt care (which I'm assuming it is not), then how can we justify them being allowed to, in effect, practice medicine?

Shouldn't the answer instead be for groups of physicians to start urban, primary care clinics in underserved areas, and work there for less money??? Hmm, not too many docs lining up to do that it seems. Physicians really shoot themselves in the foot on this primary care issue. They get all high and might about ancillary professionals, but in reality it is their own fault because not enough physicians are willing to make less money practicing primary care in underserved areas.

The problem is, primary care CAN get complicated. Is it appropriate for people with less training to be attempting this job? Do pharmacists have this kind of training? I think we need to ask some pharmacists what they feel they are ready to do.
 
Pharmacy clinics assume a diagnosis has been made. We know how to deal with multiple drug therapies from multiple diseases. We know that if someone is on Warfarin and an antibiotic is started, you'll need to monitor the INR more closely, and etc.
There are multiple kinds of pharmacy residencies. Assuming a pharmacist does a pharmacy practice residency, it is all about direct patient care from a pharmaceutical perspective.
We talk about the pathophysiology of diseases within our therapeutics and pharmacology courses.
In the coming years, there will be a lack of PCPs in most markets. Only 1/3 of doctors specialize in the primary care specialities. It means opportunity for everyone else. Illinois is the latest state to give all pharmacists dependent prescription authority.
Most pharmacy majors will take two years of physiology: one year as undergrad and one year in pharmacy school proper.
 
So since MD's and DO's receive only 1 or 2 semesters of pharmacotherapy, they probably should not be allowed to prescribe meds, is that what you are saying? PharmDs are not trying to take over the role of a physician, it comes down to physicians not having enough time to discuss and pour over each patients record to see which drug may be best for the diagnoses they already received from their physician! I think it is very important to have a good working relationship with PharmDs and physicians. I just don't get why you feel so threatened :scared: by pharmacist helping people better control their diabetes, BP, or anti-coag. In the long run it benefits everybody involved; the patients have better outcomes, physicians have more time, and healthcare will cost less.👍
 
I agree that pharmacists and physicians need a good working relationship. I love picking the brains of the pharmacists with whom I work. They help me give my patients better care.

The concern is that insurance companies will find a way to substitute non-physicians in traditional physician roles. Yes, there will be a hugh shortage of primary care physicians soon. Why? Primary care is tough. Reimbursements are low (apparently NY medicaid pays $17 a visit, no matter how complex), and medical education debt is high. The average debt is now over $100k. So, even if they wanted to, most doctors couldn't afford to provide care in the inner cities. I wonder what the average educational debt of a NP is.

We all have very special different skill sets, but business people may not realize this, and find us somewhat interchangeable. I would love to have a "clinic" staffed with diabetes educators and pharmacists to help my patients. I just think that a physician should be directing the care.
 
If I were a pharmacist, I'm not sure if I would want to get into the primary care game. If the patient starts to view me as their PCP and I miss something, it's a legal nightmare. Since most pharmacists are employed by a retail giant, that's an extra incentive for patients to file a lawsuit. Primary care economics sucks and it's too much headache for too little benefit.
 
Shouldn't the answer instead be for groups of physicians to start urban, primary care clinics in underserved areas, and work there for less money??? Hmm, not too many docs lining up to do that it seems. Physicians really shoot themselves in the foot on this primary care issue. They get all high and might about ancillary professionals, but in reality it is their own fault because not enough physicians are willing to make less money practicing primary care in underserved areas.

The problem is, primary care CAN get complicated. Is it appropriate for people with less training to be attempting this job? Do pharmacists have this kind of training? I think we need to ask some pharmacists what they feel they are ready to do.

The goal of pharmacists isn't to provide low cost care for the homeless and underserved poor. Clinics in underserved areas are a trojan horse to get in the door and open up clinics in all areas. The lawyers that make up our government and accountants at insurance companies are perfectly happy to sell out the medical profession to every pseudo-doctor that comes along to save a few bucks, and the move to let pharmacists practice medicine is no different.
 
From a historical perspective, pharmacists prescribing is not odd. Until about a hundred years ago, the two professions were mixed. Both doctors and pharmacists prescribed and dispensed. It was the APhA and AMA who made an agreement to divide them.
 
From a historical perspective, pharmacists prescribing is not odd. Until about a hundred years ago, the two professions were mixed. Both doctors and pharmacists prescribed and dispensed. It was the APhA and AMA who made an agreement to divide them.

This may have been true 100 years ago when we didn't know squat about pathophysiology or diseases. Now that we do, you need physicians who are trained in those fields extensively to diagnose and treat. It's funny when pharmacists think that they are qualified to diagnose and treat. Pharmacists are important, but they serve in different role.
 
I can speak to this topic directly since I'm a CA pharmacist.

We cannot, do not, are not trained, nor want to independently diagnose illness. That is the major crux of this issue! Not lawyers, selling out the medical practice or anything else.

Pharmacists do not diagnose - not now, not then nor do we want to in the future.

However, in CA, we do have a complex number of collaborative practice agrements with physicians. These have all gone before the CA state board of pharmacy & the CA state board of medicine & osteopathtic medicine. They can be very complex, as demonstrated by those which involve Kaiser or CA VA system. Or, they can be simple, like those which involve emergency contraception or immunization.

For those with complex diabetes or htn agreements, the diagonsis must have already been made or must have met parameters set by the physicians who write the collaborative practice agreement (again - these are not independent - physicians are involved.).

The collaborative practice agreement is not statewide - it is among a set group of physicians - only those who sign they will retain diagnositic & medical decision making ability. The protocols are straightforward - similar to heparin protocols within hospitals.

You are right - I'm a UCSF graduate. I took a year of anatomy & physiology & neurophysiology. The very SAME class the medical students & dental students took - we sat (or stood by the dissecting table) side by side for a whole year (altho the dental students took an extra quarter of head & neck - i know - my husband is a dentist). We also all took the very same histology, microbiology & biochemistry courses. We diverged when medical students went on to disease processes & diagnoses & we went into pharmacolgy, kinetics & pharmaceutical chemistry.

So - you think there is very little benefit to an invoved pharmacist? Well - when the patient says their 90 day supply of insulin has been out of refrigeration for the whole 90 days since they don't have refigeration & their Medicare allowance allows Lantus (at a cost of >#$500)...then, the input of a pharmacist might indeed be cost effective. Particularly when the temperatures in LA went outside the stability parameters of the drug considering they were homeless.

No - we don't diagnose diabetes, htn, or any other disease, but - I'm not sure those attendings or residents who are (or used to be) at MLK Medical Center were all that worried either.

Those physicians were there at the moment & moved on - I think the whole medical center has or is in the process of closing & in that one area the statewide Medicaid system as abadoned these folks. These same diabetics or hypertensive patients who don't live in the same place from one month to the next do still need their Lantus, Humalog or anything else they might need. We try to provide that & get them the care they need. We try to do that in the most cost effective manner possible given they might have coverage this month, but not next month.

The thing we HATE doing is replacing drugs which have been lost or not kept in proper storage conditions because of home issues. This is a cost issue for us. We don't bill for a physician office visit. We bill for drugs. When we have to eat the cost of the drug, we get ticked off. If we can bill for maintenance medication monitoring & be sure they are sticking to their regimen - WHICH YOU HAVE PRESCIRBED! - how can you object???? If this involves us making a home visit (which might be a bush next to the freeway) - again....how can you object???

Do you have ANY idea of how much money is tied up in maintaing a pharmacy???? It is our obligation to be sure the patient has medication which is effective at the time they need it. It keeps our liabilty low to make sure they are maintaining the regimen - you have set forth!

So - when you walk out that examining room & think you've met your responsibilites by writing that rx - think about how that person might get that rx filled. How might that person pay for that rx? They may have coverage this month for a 90 day supply, but they know they won't have the coverage next month. But, next month, they may be living out of their car. Who is going to try to make that therapy happen that you have so glibly prescribed & how are they going to keep their drugs stable & in a safe place?

We try - yesl, we try......we don't want to take your place. We just don't want to not be paid for what we do, nor do we want to have to replace a product which does not work. It is in no ones interest to have your patient return to the ED.

Personally, I can agree with your concerns. But, when I dispense daily to people who live lives you cannot imagine.....I object to you telling me I'm trying to do your job. I'm just trying to do mine!
 
^^^
I don't think anyone is accusing you of over-stepping your bounds. The way you put it, it sounds perfectly reasonable for someone to play a more active role in the management of their pt's medications. I just question why it should be a *pharmacist* that does it.

Aren't nurses already filling this role? For example, home infusion nurses (CRNI's) follow around 20-30 pt's at once, keep track of all their meds, and make home visits to perform maintenance, educate, refill drugs, and generally keep the pt on the correct management program.

I don't see how a pharmacist's training would be of any greater help in these matters. It seems more fitting for a pharmacist to moonlight as drug designer or do pharmaceutical research....than to essentially work as a nurse, carrying out the physician's orders but managing the pt's care plan.

That said, if the person is already coming into the pharmacist on a monthly basis, it could be more efficient.

Maybe I'm just missing the point here.
 
^^^
I don't think anyone is accusing you of over-stepping your bounds. The way you put it, it sounds perfectly reasonable for someone to play a more active role in the management of their pt's medications. I just question why it should be a *pharmacist* that does it.

Aren't nurses already filling this role? For example, home infusion nurses (CRNI's) follow around 20-30 pt's at once, keep track of all their meds, and make home visits to perform maintenance, educate, refill drugs, and generally keep the pt on the correct management program.

I don't see how a pharmacist's training would be of any greater help in these matters. It seems more fitting for a pharmacist to moonlight as drug designer or do pharmaceutical research....than to essentially work as a nurse, carrying out the physician's orders but managing the pt's care plan.

That said, if the person is already coming into the pharmacist on a monthly basis, it could be more efficient.

Maybe I'm just missing the point here.

Nope - nurses are not already filling this role. First, most of these pts don't see a home infusion nurse - they aren't receiving home infusions. And, when I did work in a home infusion pharmacy, the goal was to teach the family so the nurse did not have to come in everyday. Your basic diabetic, htn, cad or post mi does not have home nursing - why???? There is no basis for payment. But, that pt does come into a pharmacy at least once a month & perhaps more often.

The, perhaps, sad reality is the most commonly visited health professional is a pharmacist. We are there everyday & without an appointment. We get called 24-7 (in those 24hr pharmacies) & answer questions, often to the best of our ability when the physician's office is closed. The nurse you might have hired to do just this....well that individual often does not work daily or the job itself is job-shared & again - not available on weekends & at night.

As for "moonlighting" - which implies another job to make more money. This is not moonlighting. This is part of our job & we make fine money without needing another one. There is absolutely NO way any of us could drop right into a research or drug design position at drug development firm - we do NOT have that knowledge or those skills & clearly - you don't know what goes into desiging these complicated & very expensive drugs we use today.

The point is - your patients are not following thru on their regimens. The system that has been in place does not work. Study after study shows the closer the pt is monitored, the more likely he/she is to stay on the prescribed regimen. The medical reimbursement issues have prevented physicians from having those frequent, chatty, but informative & reinforcing visits of 30 years ago (which my mother speaks fondly of....).

We are trying to steer care around to prevent sequele. That said - these medications people often have to take make them feel horrible. They are tired, have dry mouth, make urinary problems worse, etc....When they can't get thru to your office, or leave a message with your receptionist & don't get a call back - or the call gets back a week later.....they've propbably already come and talked to me a few times. We'd like to work WITH you to get them on the regimen you want them on, changes done promptly when needed & concerns dealt with quickly.

Now - is it clearer why pharmacists are filling the role?
 
The, perhaps, sad reality is the most commonly visited health professional is a pharmacist. We are there everyday & without an appointment.

What happens if patients use mail order to get their drugs? I think they just bypassed the middleman retail pharmacist. 😛

Seriously, it's quite risky medico-legally to be changing meds around if you don't check bp, labs, do a physical, review their charts. Maybe you aren't worried about it, but I bet your retail giant employer does because they are the ones on the hook for these pharm cowboys.

I hate to burst your bubble, but this is basically a non-issue.
 
What happens if patients use mail order to get their drugs? I think they just bypassed the middleman retail pharmacist. 😛

Seriously, it's quite risky medico-legally to be changing meds around if you don't check bp, labs, do a physical, review their charts. Maybe you aren't worried about it, but I bet your retail giant employer does because they are the ones on the hook for these pharm cowboys.

I hate to burst your bubble, but this is basically a non-issue.

You're right - this is a non-issue, which makes me wonder why you brought it up...😕

I'm paid right now to monitor certain patients, I do & follow the protocols.

Some of those patients get their meds thru mail order. Where the product comes from makes no difference. I still monitor them. Its a professional service which I'm paid for unrelated directly to who absorbed the cost of the drug (other than the insurer). When I function as an arm of mail order, I'm considering the product from their perspective same as I would if it were my own stock.

I also still get patients who comes in to ask all manner of questions & give me complaints about why they can't get their dr to answer (had about 6 of those today - Friday before a weekend!). Funny, but sad situation - I had 3 patients who were trying to get rxs at 5PM sent to me & this particular clinic (has 300+ physicians) shuts their phones off at 5PM & shunts all calls to the Urgent Care center. I had havoc with 3 families getting shut off automatically at 5PM! By 7PM,, I finally had it all worked out, but really - rapid response to outpatients is not ambulatory medicine's strong point.

Nope - I don't worry about the legal issues because the parameters I've got to change the doses (rare, but they are there) are set by the physicians who've written them.....did you read that - the physcians have written them!

So, I get the INR, evaluate what has occured between the last INR & this one & the dose changes....or not - all info gets electronically sent to whatever md is following the case concurrently with me. The charts are online - again - a non-issue. My recommendations are approved within 24 hours for these patients - much, much faster than traditional ambulatory medicine. We do QA to follow outcome & M&M, so we track positive & negative outcomes as well as economic outcomes of physician visits, missed doses, etc...

Yep - non-issue & really not that hard. In fact, Kaiser does most of its work this way for maintenance medications & they have a pretty good track record.

If you don't want to participate, you don't get involved. But,many of your colleagues do.

Most areas of the country have something of this kind, unless you're in a state which doesn't allow for it. But, there aren't very many of those.
 
What you're doing is nothing new. We have a coumadin clinic where the pharm's can change warfarin dosage to maintain INR. Pharms are not diagnosing or coming up with treatment plans. It's too risky medico-legally. Non-issue, but it is a good demonstration of how other groups are never happy with their scope.
 
The dumbing down of medicine in this country continues! First, they let the nurses practice medicine. Now they're letting the pharmacists too. Soon, the pharmacists will claim that treating and diagnosing ailments have been the province of pharmacy since the dawn of time. 🙄

If, as a physician, you are worried that you will be replaced by a nurse or pharmacist, then you probably aren't very good at your job.

(That's not a knock on nurses or pharmacists).
 
What you're doing is nothing new. We have a coumadin clinic where the pharm's can change warfarin dosage to maintain INR. Pharms are not diagnosing or coming up with treatment plans. It's too risky medico-legally. Non-issue, but it is a good demonstration of how other groups are never happy with their scope.

Exactly the point! Bingo!

I'm very happy with my scope!

Agreed - non-issue!
 
If, as a physician, you are worried that you will be replaced by a nurse or pharmacist, then you probably aren't very good at your job.

(That's not a knock on nurses or pharmacists).

👍
 
Thoughts:

1) Once again this shows that all the pretenders want what we got: money and respect. They want to play doctor just like all the midlevels. Thats what this is about, it dont got jack **** to do with patient care.

2) Somebody nailed it above. You guys are fools if you think that pharmacists are content to go after hte homeless bums that no doctor wants to treat. This is a trojan horse. Its the same crap the NPs and PAs pulled. In the beginning it was all about helping the poor rural folks. Funny how it always changes into a "I want the big city subspecialist market" after a decade or two.

3) I'm in favor of federal law banning doctors getting reimbursed for "collaborating" with these pretenders or midlevels in general. Lets see how many doctors support "collaborative" agreements with pharmacists, NPs, and PAs when they cant get reimbursed for them anymore. Its time for a scorched earth approach to cut off the docs who are stabbing us in the back with this nonsense.
 
This is a non-issue for now. When the NP's were first created, who would would have ever thought these RN's with a certificate originally would be practicing medicine independently and prescribing meds 40 years later, right? It's not about how good you are as a doc; it comes down to scope creep and how others want a piece of your action. It's the docs who were naive about the potential consequences who got us into this mess in the first place. 🙄
 
This is a non-issue for now. When the NP's were first created, who would would have ever thought these RN's with a certificate originally would be practicing medicine independently and prescribing meds 40 years later, right? It's not about how good you are as a doc; it comes down to scope creep and how others want a piece of your action. It's the docs who were naive about the potential consequences who got us into this mess in the first place. 🙄


Awwww... Aren't we Smug.... Docs complain and complain but no one does primary care anymore, its all PA and NPs because it just doesn't pay well. Then there are the physicians who complain about others doing plastic surgery and not being board certified.....No one wants to diagnose anything....there is already a PA doing that at CVS minute clinic.

Mailorder.....maybe for retail but Rphs work in anything from managed care to SNF mgmt, to HCAHO etc... You can't tell me an Rph didnt save your ass several times, esp as Patients go to several different physicians.
Example:
I helped stop a patient from taking 3 SSRIs by 3 different doctors (family was just "picking up the meds").
I notified physicians when patients complain about harmful side effects and help patients avoid side effects by taking meds at proper times......

And dont even get me started on how you are tricked but drug reps over and over again to prescribe superflous expensive meds like a long acting tetracycline when the half life is less than 4 hrs apart but the cost is 20x more or how the rep tells you about "genetic factors" and Rabeprazole being diff than other PPIs...

I could keep typing but I've decided that you're a piece of snot. Im done.
 
What is the sound of a thread being resurrected?
 
****
 
Last edited:
Awwww... Aren't we Smug.... Docs complain and complain but no one does primary care anymore, its all PA and NPs because it just doesn't pay well. Then there are the physicians who complain about others doing plastic surgery and not being board certified.....No one wants to diagnose anything....there is already a PA doing that at CVS minute clinic.

Mailorder.....maybe for retail but Rphs work in anything from managed care to SNF mgmt, to HCAHO etc... You can't tell me an Rph didnt save your ass several times, esp as Patients go to several different physicians.
Example:
I helped stop a patient from taking 3 SSRIs by 3 different doctors (family was just "picking up the meds").
I notified physicians when patients complain about harmful side effects and help patients avoid side effects by taking meds at proper times......

And dont even get me started on how you are tricked but drug reps over and over again to prescribe superflous expensive meds like a long acting tetracycline when the half life is less than 4 hrs apart but the cost is 20x more or how the rep tells you about "genetic factors" and Rabeprazole being diff than other PPIs...

I could keep typing but I've decided that you're a piece of snot. Im done.

Inferiority complex: an acute sense of personal inferiority often resulting through overcompensation in exaggerated aggressiveness (Websters).

Enjoy your $100k salary as a pharmacist. 🙄
 
Last edited:
Enjoy your $100k salary as a pharmacist. 🙄

Or whatever is left of that salary when the malpractice lawyers sue his behind for practicing medicine without a license and injuring/killing patients.
 
There should be no legal restrictions on who can do what in healthcare. The choice of who to consult for health advice should be left to the discretion of consumers.
 
the average pharmacist knows much much more about drugs and drug interactions than the average MD. Everything is chemical so they also know much more about how diet impacts health. If doctors want to push patients out after 10 minutes then more power to the pharm guys to pick up where doctors refuse to go.
 
There should be no legal restrictions on who can do what in healthcare. The choice of who to consult for health advice should be left to the discretion of consumers.

Welcome to the middle ages! Population: 1
 
the average pharmacist knows much much more about drugs and drug interactions than the average MD. Everything is chemical so they also know much more about how diet impacts health. If doctors want to push patients out after 10 minutes then more power to the pharm guys to pick up where doctors refuse to go.

"pick up where doctors refuse to go"


What the heck does that mean? Are you saying pharmacists should start practicing medicine? Then go to medical school like doctors!
 
Welcome to the middle ages! Population: 1

There is no connection between laissez-faire capitalism and the middle ages. You are being irrational.
 
"pick up where doctors refuse to go"


What the heck does that mean? Are you saying pharmacists should start practicing medicine? Then go to medical school like doctors!

Do you believe that doctors should be able to prescibe drugs? Then go to pharmacy school like pharmacists!

See the contradiction there?
 
Do you believe that doctors should be able to prescibe drugs? Then go to pharmacy school like pharmacists!

See the contradiction there?

No.

Prescribing drugs is part of practicing medicine, not part of being a pharmacist.
 
Do you believe that doctors should be able to prescibe drugs? Then go to pharmacy school like pharmacists!

See the contradiction there?

Your argument is full of holes. Medical students do learn a significant amount about pharmacology and its application to pathology. Can't say that about pharmacists learning the clinical workup.
 
Think of it like this: in the LT care of a pt, diagnosis is but a tiny part of what happens. You diagnose a pt with DM once. And then there's lifelong tx - decisions about which drugs to start, which drugs to stop in the face of declining renal function; like, what dose of metformin is appropriate if the pt has a creatinine clearance of 50mL/min; when to start insulin. If the pt has diabetic nephropathy with macroalbuminuria, do you start an ACEI or an ARB, or both, and when, and what dosages? etc etc.

Or a patient who has been taking methadone for drug abuse treatment needs to be started on HAART. Do you know which ARVs affect the methadone, and how, and which you should maybe avoid? Or if your pt has tuberculosis, do you start HAART+TB tx right away, or one or the other 1st?

Basically, medicine is getting more complicated all the time. There are a lot more drugs on the market than when I graduated in 1986. For instance, back then, the treatment for MI was O2 and a morphine drip. And tx for AIDS was, well, entirely palliative.

It's impossible for one professional to be the expert in everything, even in one specialty. Drs bring in their clinical skills, and pharmacists bring in their more detailed knowledge of pharmacology. Both are qualified to prescribe in some circumstances - both require partnership with the other for good care to happen.
 
Drs bring in their clinical skills, and pharmacists bring in their more detailed knowledge of pharmacology. Both are qualified to prescribe in some circumstances - both require partnership with the other for good care to happen.

Every time a pharmacy calls or faxes my office, it costs me money. If you think I'm going to "partner" with pharmacists without being paid for it, you're nuts.

I'm already wasting my time sending HgBA1c readings to useless "chronic disease managers" who add nothing to patient care. And those "helpful" notices warning me of "possible medication noncompliance" (usually because a patient changed pharmacies)? And that friendly PharmD auditing charts in the assisted living center who continually reminds me that I should be checking labs (which I'm already doing, even if they don't have it in their chart because they've never asked for it)?

I don't need more of that bull****. Neither do patients.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Every time a pharmacy calls or faxes my office, it costs me money.
The idea is to create less bull****, not more. Often pharmacists have to call dr's offices because we legally have to, not because we're not qualified to make a judgement call on certain situations ourselves. A silly little example: having to fax you because you wrote, "Wellbutrin XL 150mg bid," when the XL is a once-a-day formulation, the pt has been receiving the SR for years, and I know **** well you meant SR. But as it stands now, I legally have to bug you for that.
 
The idea is to create less bull****, not more. Often pharmacists have to call dr's offices because we legally have to, not because we're not qualified to make a judgement call on certain situations ourselves. A silly little example: having to fax you because you wrote, "Wellbutrin XL 150mg bid," when the XL is a once-a-day formulation, the pt has been receiving the SR for years, and I know **** well you meant SR. But as it stands now, I legally have to bug you for that.

I don't mind being called if there's an error or a legitimate need for clarification. I sure as hell wouldn't want a pharmacist changing a prescription to what he/she thought I meant. That's a recipe for disaster, unless they're teaching mind-reading in pharmacy school now.

That's not the kind of stuff I'm talking about, though.
 
Top