Walgreens Question

[Charcoales]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Shringrix for 40 yo, cant administer even if they have rx and willing to pay cash if not covered? Does protocol allow us to administer if under recommended age limits if patient consents and is aware?

 

[Drugsarefun2350]

probably depends on the state, in florida, no

 

[Charcoales]

probably depends on the state, in florida, no

So far, I told the pt we couldnt because as pharmacists we work under an independent doctors protocol which we have to follow our vaccine selection tool for and if it says we can't administer then we cant go against that even if another doctor says its ok.

 

[owlegrad]

probably depends on the state, in florida, no

Really? I thought if they had a script you were giving it based on the script, not the protocol and therefor it is legal.

Well, I hope the board doesn’t come after me as I violated this a few times back in my retail days.

 

[Lnsean]

Umm no. This is not good, never assume that. You can log into storenet and follow the immunization tool and it will tell you if it's legal in your state. It varies from state to state. With a rx, you can absolutely dispense the vaccine for the pt to bring to their doctors office. Whether you can give it or not is dependent on state laws. Theres been quite a few STARS reports bc techs or rphs forget to check with the tool.

Always run the immunization tool.

 

[ifillrxs]

FDA, ACIP, state law, standing order protocol, company policy. Almost too much to keep track of. The Immunization Selection Tool wraps it all up into one concise resource.

Shingrix is ACIP recommended for age 50 and older.

 

[thecoolpharmboi]

You cannot administer even if you have prescription (at least in Texas). I think if you put it in IST it will tell you no.

 

[MilknCheerios]

As others have mentioned, use the Immunization selection tool and follow your quirky state protocols. I don't believe you can even dispense to give to a patient to administer at a doctor's office because an immunizing pharmacist is required to enter into IC+ which arm it was given. If I was in this scenario, I would recommend the patient get it at the doctor's office and if they can't get it, too bad.

 

[ifillrxs]

As others have mentioned, use the Immunization selection tool and follow your quirky state protocols. I don't believe you can even dispense to give to a patient to administer at a doctor's office because an immunizing pharmacist is required to enter into IC+ which arm it was given. If I was in this scenario, I would recommend the patient get it at the doctor's office and if they can't get it, too bad.

You can dispense it, like any other medication, pursuant to a prescription. There will not be a VAR (Vaccine Administration Record), therefore no documentation needed about which arm it was given.

 

[txpharmguy]

You cannot administer even if you have prescription (at least in Texas). I think if you put it in IST it will tell you no.

We've dispended Shingrix to a patient pursuant to a prescription who brought it their doctors office for administration.

 

[MilknCheerios]

You can dispense it, like any other medication, pursuant to a prescription. There will not be a VAR (Vaccine Administration Record), therefore no documentation needed about which arm it was given.

I would re-read over your pharmacy's immunization protocol. I'm not saying you're wrong, but in the state that I practice in, there's a quote in there that says pharmacists can not distribute vaccines which I interpret as not dispensing and only administering.

 

[JustFillIt]

If there is an Rx for it. Contact dr and explain guidelines. Then document your intervention and the reason for deviation. Thats called transfer of liability.

 

[Lnsean]

I would re-read over your pharmacy's immunization protocol. I'm not saying you're wrong, but in the state that I practice in, there's a quote in there that says pharmacists can not distribute vaccines which I interpret as not dispensing and only administering.

That's not true. You can dispense it with an rx. It's like any other injectables. The problem is only with administration. Besides, distribution and dispense have specific meanings, I'm not sure why you would be confused between the two.

 

[ifillrxs]

I would re-read over your pharmacy's immunization protocol. I'm not saying you're wrong, but in the state that I practice in, there's a quote in there that says pharmacists can not distribute vaccines which I interpret as not dispensing and only administering.

This is true. It cannot be dispensed using the standing order protocol. It can be dispensed using a prescription.

 

[3boooda]

I always tell my techs to put all info into the immunization tool no matter if patient has rx from the doctor

 

[projektreverb]

I always tell my techs to put all info into the immunization tool no matter if patient has rx from the doctor

Same. That’s exactly what I do as well.

 

[waitforit24]

We've dispended Shingrix to a patient pursuant to a prescription who brought it their doctors office for administration.

Sounds like a major lawsuit waiting to happen. Never, ever, ever dispense a vaccine to a patient as the patient is not a healthcare provider and you cannot ensure that the cold chain protocol is being followed. Administer in the pharmacy yes because you have total control over the process, give to patient to take to doctor big no no because you relinquish all control and said patient can keep the vaccine in hot car for all you know and then you the pharmacist and/or pharmacy are liable for anything that happens to the patient. Think the doctor will cover your back, think again, they will wash their hands of the problem.

 

[lord999]

Sounds like a major lawsuit waiting to happen. Never, ever, ever dispense a vaccine to a patient as the patient is not a healthcare provider and you cannot ensure that the cold chain protocol is being followed. Administer in the pharmacy yes because you have total control over the process, give to patient to take to doctor big no no because you relinquish all control and said patient can keep the vaccine in hot car for all you know and then you the pharmacist and/or pharmacy are liable for anything that happens to the patient. Think the doctor will cover your back, think again, they will wash their hands of the problem.

No, just no, remember how adulteration liability works? Moment it leaves your environment to a properly dispensed prescription in the hands of the patient, that's the patient's problem to follow the instructions you gave them on the proper handling. Patient leaves and leaves the vaccine to bake in the AZ sun for a couple of days before s/he enters the office for the administration, that's partly the patient's fault for not following the PI, not yours. Physician wants to argue supply chains, invoice the pharmacy for a properly handled shipment or order from the public health authority, because it's the physician's own stupidity for making the patient do a job which is actually supposed to be theirs in terms of office administration procurement.

Also, Jones v Irvin or McKee v. American Home Prods. for the example of a beyond reasonably stupid patient or about liability for dangerous product use separating honest errors from negligence from willful stupidity.

On the topic of vaccines, you have a valid prescription under both federal and state law, you can dispense. The feds are mostly silent on dispensing immunizations for later administration, but states do impose additional criteria where FL can dispense but not necessarily AZ. Things that work out in NM which have fairly liberal use would not fit AZ's regulations for a protocol.

 

[Lnsean]

Sounds like a major lawsuit waiting to happen. Never, ever, ever dispense a vaccine to a patient as the patient is not a healthcare provider and you cannot ensure that the cold chain protocol is being followed. Administer in the pharmacy yes because you have total control over the process, give to patient to take to doctor big no no because you relinquish all control and said patient can keep the vaccine in hot car for all you know and then you the pharmacist and/or pharmacy are liable for anything that happens to the patient. Think the doctor will cover your back, think again, they will wash their hands of the problem.

Lmao. Can't believe this is from an actual practicing rph. You might as well not dispense anything in your fridge then, those are gonna be lawsuits too.

No wonder the profession is at its lows these days. I can't believe what I'm reading.

 

[owlegrad]

Lmao. Can't believe this is from an actual practicing rph. You might as well not dispense anything in your fridge then, those are gonna be lawsuits too.

No wonder the profession is at its lows these days. I can't believe what I'm reading.

I was thinking the same thing. I suppose they administer insulin as well since patients can’t be trusted with it and it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen.

 

[waitforit24]

I was thinking the same thing. I suppose they administer insulin as well since patients can’t be trusted with it and it’s a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Yeah only difference is insulin you counsel the patient on how to use. Do you counsel the patient on how to administer the vaccine?

 

[waitforit24]

Lmao. Can't believe this is from an actual practicing rph. You might as well not dispense anything in your fridge then, those are gonna be lawsuits too.

No wonder the profession is at its lows these days. I can't believe what I'm reading.

Never in all my years working as a pharmacist have I heard or seen my fellow colleagues give a patient a vaccine to transport to the doctor who then administers it. But hey you do you and I will do what I do, it’s worked out pretty well so far.

 

[projektreverb]

Literally looked this over today. Wags has a document for this. TLDR it’s allowed.

 

[Lnsean]

Never in all my years working as a pharmacist have I heard or seen my fellow colleagues give a patient a vaccine to transport to the doctor who then administers it. But hey you do you and I will do what I do, it’s worked out pretty well so far.

You doing you is fine. I dont have a problem with an ignorant pharmacist. If you dont know your sht that's on you.

I chimed in because you were trying to spread your ignorance onto others. Like you said, you do you, but dont come on here and spew that non sense. You dont have a clue what you speak of. It's scary that you're practicing.

 

[JustFillIt]

Lmao. Can't believe this is from an actual practicing rph. You might as well not dispense anything in your fridge then, those are gonna be lawsuits too.

No wonder the profession is at its lows these days. I can't believe what I'm reading.

I think the poor guy had good intentions on what he said. Maybe he said it a bit hasty and it came out wrong. (Your cool in my book waitforit)

Anyway - I have a curve ball for you. I had a very well know physician come and ask me to dispense to him a tdap and he wanted to administer it to himself at home. I figured wth and let him have it.

Am I gonna get sued?

 

[waitforit24]

You doing you is fine. I dont have a problem with an ignorant pharmacist. If you dont know your sht that's on you.

I chimed in because you were trying to spread your ignorance onto others. Like you said, you do you, but dont come on here and spew that non sense. You dont have a clue what you speak of. It's scary that you're practicing.

You sound like a very pleasant person to be around. It’s a good thing you picked pharmacy as your profession, it suits you just fine it seems from your position on your high horse.

 

[lord999]

You sound like a very pleasant person to be around. It’s a good thing you picked pharmacy as your profession, it suits you just fine it seems from your position on your high horse.

(Strained laughter) That's perfect! FYI, @Lnsean is going to very soon have authority to write orders that you're going to have to follow. If I remember correctly, he's a 2M right now but still possesses an active RPh. And because he still retains the right of practice, I'm sure he won't hesitate to remind you of that if you don't fill a prescription appropriately. We do have a number of dual professionals in this business.

 

[waitforit24]

(Strained laughter) That's perfect! FYI, @Lnsean is going to very soon have authority to write orders that you're going to have to follow. If I remember correctly, he's a 2M right now but still possesses an active RPh. And because he still retains the right of practice, I'm sure he won't hesitate to remind you of that if you don't fill a prescription appropriately. We do have a number of dual professionals in this business.

That explains a lot, of course they know everything, who dare question anything the almighty doctor say. Gtfo here with that. Miserable prick

 

[JustFillIt]

That explains a lot, of course they know everything, who dare question anything the almighty doctor say. Gtfo here with that. Miserable prick

Oh snap... I guess my attempt at changing the subject didn’t work.

 

[Lnsean]

You sound like a very pleasant person to be around. It’s a good thing you picked pharmacy as your profession, it suits you just fine it seems from your position on your high horse.

You were trying to pass off your made up rule up in your little head about dispensing vaccine and how we are liable for the "adulteration." If you believe it that's one thing, but the sht you post on here affects other people who migh think what you said was accurate when it was all non sense and silly scare tactics.

 

[projektreverb]

Y’all need to calm down. No wonder we are the laughing stock of the medical community. Hell, pharmacists are the laughing stock of pharmacists. Go figure. The rules are there. Learn them.