Post-dated Schedule 2 / CII meds on same hard copy?

[Temple2014]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I ran into this twice lately and don't have a definite answer from google or anyone I've asked, other than most people say no.

Can a current and future dated CII script be on one hard copy? I.e. Two different prescriptions, one for now and one dated for next month, same drug, quantity, and instructions but on one prescription blank with only one prescriber signature.

I think no too. I've requested new Rx's for the patients to be safe and had no problem. Anyone have any thoughts or know?

 

[owlegrad]

Well last time I checked post dating a legal document is illegal, so I am going to go with "no" on this.

 

[Temple2014]

Well last time I checked post dating a legal document is illegal, so I am going to go with "no" on this.

Scripts can be post dated with a "fill date".

 

[BenJammin]

Post dated prescriptions are illegal. Some states allow C2s to have earliest fill dates listed on the pad but a C2 must be dated the day it was signed.

 

[Temple2014]

Post dated prescriptions are illegal. Some states allow C2s to have earliest fill dates listed on the pad but a C2 must be dated the day it was signed.

Sorry, should've clarified fill date vs. post date.

Script is dated from yesterday with two exact Rx's but on one copy. One can be filled now, and the second has a fill date of next month. Can the same hard copy be used to fill for both dates? I thought you needed a new script blank for each "do not fill until" Rx's.

 

[HouTX]

since you didn't clarify which state.. in Texas, only one drug per triplicate form or it's invalid

 

[zelman]

Sorry, should've clarified fill date vs. post date.

Script is dated from yesterday with two exact Rx's but on one copy. One can be filled now, and the second has a fill date of next month. Can the same hard copy be used to fill for both dates? I thought you needed a new script blank for each "do not fill until" Rx's.

Does your state allow for two C2 rx's on one blank?

 

[Temple2014]

Does your state allow for two C2 rx's on one blank?

Yes. Not sure about post fill dating on one Rx blank though. I can't even find clarification for federal law.

 

[zelman]

Yes. Not sure about post fill dating on one Rx blank though. I can't even find clarification for federal law.

Then I don't see why it would be a problem. Two valid prescriptions, validly placed on one blank can't invalidate one another.

 

[Ackj]

What about expiration of the second rx? In NY you only have 30 days to fill a control rx, so the second half of it would be invalid by the time it became due.

 

[Carboxide]

I would say no because you can't fill them both at once, you can't return the hard copy after doing the first one, and you can't transfer it to another pharmacy because it's a CII.

 

[owlegrad]

Then I don't see why it would be a problem. Two valid prescriptions, validly placed on one blank can't invalidate one another.

I sorta get the question. You can't have medications of different schedules on the same blank and most CIIs are written on a blank by themselves so I can understand wanting to double check that something he never saw before is ok.

 

[Temple2014]

I'm in WA. C2's are valid for 6 months here (good luck trying to fill one beyond 2 months if not for continuing therapy). We also allow up to "a 90 day supply" to be filled, whether it would be 1 Rx for 90 days or 2 future fill dates (3 Rx's total filled 3 different times each month - "future fill dates") to equal a 90 day supply. Pretty liberal Rx laws compared to a lot of states. But we have a PMP any pharmacist can access. We allow for multiple Rx's on 1 blank. Norco, Zofran, and 1 other on 1 hard copy. File the script w/ the C2's and make a copy of it for the non C2 records. We don't even use the "C" stamp.

 

[Sine Cura]

Nevada addresses this situation specifically. You can have a blank with a CII and other drugs (CII or otherwise), but if you write a "do not fill before" CII script, there cannot be any other drugs on the blank. http://www.leg.state.nv.us/nac/NAC-453.html

The 14-day rule in Nevada, where CIIs are invalid if they aren't taken in by a pharmacy in the 14 days after date of issue, also allows CII scripts with a future fill date to be filled as long as they are received by a pharmacy within 14 days after the "do not fill before" date.

California also allows CIIs with other stuff on the blank, but there is nothing specific about prohibiting multiply issued CII with "do not fill before" dates on the same piece of paper... to be safe it is not permitted in the California CSA, so do not allow it if you are in California

 

[zelman]

What about expiration of the second rx? In NY you only have 30 days to fill a control rx, so the second half of it would be invalid by the time it became due.

NY has a variety of laws that make this question not applicable there.

 

[zelman]

I would say no because you can't fill them both at once, you can't return the hard copy after doing the first one, and you can't transfer it to another pharmacy because it's a CII.

Are you always required to fill all prescriptions presented immediately?

 

[lane one]

Who cares if it's legal. It's a logistical and filing nightmare. Tell the doc it's bad practice and there is no way for you to honor both scripts and fulfill your filing obligations (which he knows nothing about). I mean if they want to post date a script to save someone an office visit, tell him to put it on a separate script. Pharmacist never has to know the difference.

 

[Carboxide]

Are you always required to fill all prescriptions presented immediately?

No. That's the whole problem. You can't fill it immediately, and if the patient decides they want to take it elsewhere later, you can't do that.

 

[zelman]

No. That's the whole problem. You can't fill it immediately, and if the patient decides they want to take it elsewhere later, you can't do that.

So, how is this different from an oxycodone IR that is due to be filled and an OxyContin that's too soon to be filled on the same prescription?

 

[Carboxide]

So, how is this different from an oxycodone IR that is due to be filled and an OxyContin that's too soon to be filled on the same prescription?

It's not. I wouldn't do that either.

 

[zelman]

It's not. I wouldn't do that either.

So...you refuse valid prescriptions because you don't know how to file them?

 

[Carboxide]

So...you refuse valid prescriptions because you don't know how to file them?

I don't have to make that decision because in my state you cannot have more than one schedule II on the same prescription. The law is there because, as I said, once they ask for one to be filled they are prohibited from receiving the other back or to get it filled at any other pharmacy because it cannot be transferred. It is too high risk for patients as now if the pharmacist decides they do not want to fill the second Rx, the patient has no way to get it filled anywhere else. The law is there to protect patients and you should not be able to make a decision that requires the next pharmacist to either fill against their conscience or to refuse to allow a patient to go elsewhere if they feel that the Rx should not be filled for any reason.

 

[zelman]

I don't have to make that decision because in my state you cannot have more than one schedule II on the same prescription. The law is there because, as I said, once they ask for one to be filled they are prohibited from receiving the other back or to get it filled at any other pharmacy because it cannot be transferred. It is too high risk for patients as now if the pharmacist decides they do not want to fill the second Rx, the patient has no way to get it filled anywhere else. The law is there to protect patients and you should not be able to make a decision that requires the next pharmacist to either fill against their conscience or to refuse to allow a patient to go elsewhere if they feel that the Rx should not be filled for any reason.

Oh. In that case, make a new thread for places where these Rx's are invalid.

 

[BidingMyTime]

Unless your state says otherwise, I would say its legal. I've never seen it done this way, but I don't see anything in federal law that would prohibit this.