Prescribing powers for pharmacists case against

[ultracet]

I was simply quoting a post from one of your pharmacy buddies in which he said something along the lines of "you don't even understand how OVEREDUCATED a pharm is to be slaving away at CVS". I brought up a valid point to his statement. IF YOU HAVE ISSUES WITH THIS take it up with your fellow pharm student. I was only stating that if he thinks that pharms are too overeducated to be working at CVS, why the option to this problem should be to increase scope of practice rather than to scale back this "OVEREDUCATION FOR CVS" problem that he stated that pharms have. I was merely questioning the logic of this statement.

dude.... you're really getting slammed over that!
lol
sorry
i tried to take the blame!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[J Lucas]

Just to clarify, I do not think Pharmacist should get pad privledges. Its just too far from the scope. If the person who is suppose to be a check in a system of checks and balances is all of a sudden the issuer.... Then who will be the checker of checker? The techs?
I have no problem with collaborative agreements and things that follow along the lines of the Pharmacist working WITH the Physician to serve the patient faster. Pharmacist only want to optimize drug treatment AFTER the initial dx by the PCP, anything other than that and these PharmD's are just out of their league in terms of training.
What I think most people are saying ,when trying to advocate prescriptive privledges, is that it is insane to have to call an on duty Physician and wait for him to call back just to make a "check box" correction or something along those lines...
I dont even see why a Pharmacist would want that can of worms anyway, do you know how much liability insurance would cost? Stick to running the Pharmacy while you are still in charge before the lawyers and HMO's try to cut up the business like they did to the PCP's.
P.S. To the poster who said that PA's have "less training" than NP, I dont think you should go there....

LOL- This discussion just made me think of a new term "Defensive Dispensing"

 

[badxmojo]

So If I was to show you studies that were conducted in which a pharmacist who was working collaboratively with a MD really did improve pateint care... improved compliance, improved patient health, decreased costs, lower mortality/morbidity what would all you nay sayers of prescribing privlidges say?

 

[group_theory]

So If I was to show you studies that were conducted in which a pharmacist who was working collaboratively with a MD really did improve pateint care... improved compliance, improved patient health, decreased costs, lower mortality/morbidity what would all you nay sayers of prescribing privlidges say?

You still haven't made the argument as to WHY the pharmacist must get script priviledges. What that study will show is that there is a greater need for physicians and pharmacists to work together. Why can't pharmacists, in collaborative agreements, issue recommendations to the physicians who will then write scripts based on these recommendations. This way, patients will get tailored drug care, the patient will have appropriate physician follow-up, and medical records will remain intact and won't have multiple sources from multiple locations writing/alterering/stopping medications.

You wanted to know the case against pharmacists getting prescribing power. Yet no one has given concrete reasons as to why the pharmacist need prescribing priviledges?

 

[badxmojo]

You still haven't made the argument as to WHY the pharmacist must get script priviledges. What that study will show is that there is a greater need for physicians and pharmacists to work together. Why can't pharmacists, in collaborative agreements, issue recommendations to the physicians who will then write scripts based on these recommendations. This way, patients will get tailored drug care, the patient will have appropriate physician follow-up, and medical records will remain intact and won't have multiple sources from multiple locations writing/alterering/stopping medications.

You wanted to know the case against pharmacists getting prescribing power. Yet no one has given concrete reasons as to why the pharmacist need prescribing priviledges?

Good questions, I'll answer you..
The reasons for granting pharmacists prescribing powers would be

It would keep the Doctor from being overwhelmeded by too many pateints. It would be great if there were a plentiful amount of MD's who had lots of time to devote to each patient. But the reality of the situation is that in some places there aren't. The Doctor does not have the time to monitor the patient and go over compliance issues. If the pharmacist had to call the Doctor everytime he/she was adjusting the dosages or changing to another drug class to treat the same disease the Doctor's time would still be taken up. I understand that you may think that if one Doctor is too busy the pateint should go to another, however in some inner cities or even rural areas there really is a dearth of MD's.
Your right physicians and pharmacists do need to work in a more collborative manner, this is why these "collaborative practice" protocols are popping up around the country. I must stress giving pharmacist prescribing powers is not akin to giving them the same privildges as MD's.
There is a certain protocol that they must follow they can't just prescribe anything they so desire.

 

[drjj]

i went to an undergraduate school that had a pharmacy program that
was ranked in the top ten of the country. Why does a pharmacist want more power? A pharmacist is defined as a person who distributes medication prescribed by a physician. If you are a pharmacist who wants more control over prescribing medication then why not go to medical school? There are specific roles in health care. The physician who diagnoses and prescribes and the pharmacist who distributes. If you want to become a physician then why not go that path? Why try to become a physician through pharmacy? I have shadowed clincial pharmacist in the hospital setting such as critical care and they do have a plethora of knowledge in the pharmaceutics and are used as consultants by physicians. Which is great, because the more we come together the better for the patient. But you must be able to link the disease (diagnosis) and medication to treat that disease accurately, and the pharmaceutical curriculum doesn't meet that vital requirement. I'm not against pharmacists and their extended powers such as consultation, but there are roles that are played so lets keep to those agreed roles since we knew those roles before applying.

 

[medic170]

i went to an undergraduate school that had a pharmacy program that
was ranked in the top ten of the country. Why does a pharmacist want more power? A pharmacist is defined as a person who distributes medication prescribed by a physician. If you are a pharmacist who wants more control over prescribing medication then why not go to medical school? There are specific roles in health care. The physician who diagnoses and prescribes and the pharmacist who distributes. If you want to become a physician then why not go that path? Why try to become a physician through pharmacy? I have shadowed clincial pharmacist in the hospital setting such as critical care and they do have a plethora of knowledge in the pharmaceutics and are used as consultants by physicians. Which is great, because the more we come together the better for the patient. But you must be able to link the disease (diagnosis) and medication to treat that disease accurately, and the pharmaceutical curriculum doesn't meet that vital requirement. I'm not against pharmacists and their extended powers such as consultation, but there are roles that are played so lets keep to those agreed roles since we knew those roles before applying.

drj, that is exactly what I was trying to say a few pages back, only you said it much better Totally agree with you