| · Public liability insurance
· Community pharmacy
· New contract
· Council election
· Prescription charges
· Repeat dispensing
· ETP
· Complementary medicine
· The Society (4)
· The Journal (2)
Letters to the Editor
|
Electronic transmission of prescriptions (ETP)
What is the benefit?
From Mr R. Gartside, FRPharmS
There are some news items which have to be read and reread before they
can be taken in, so unexpected are their contents. So it was with your
report on the start of the electronic transmission of prescriptions (ETP)
pilot (PJ, 5 March, p259), which appears a rather peculiar operation.
Patients will be given a green FP10-sized piece of paper, signed by the
prescriber with a manual pen, which will set out their medication, its
dosage, and its quantities, and will have a barcode printed vertically
down the right-hand side. Such a piece of paper is normally regarded as
a prescription and, indeed, this appears to be the case here. The dispensing
pharmacy will use a computer and barcode reader to read the barcode which
will authorise the downloading of an electronic prescription from the prescriber’s
surgery.
Why? Why does not the dispensing pharmacist simply read the printing on
the piece of green paper rather than use half a hundredweight of capricious
equipment. Is there real added value to the process that is being piloted,
or are we simply trying to appear “modern”?
There is, of course, real added value in electronic transmission of prescription
information to the Prescription Pricing Authority. Pharmacies can be paid
more quickly and more efficiently, management information on prescribers
can be generated in real time instead of four months later. All of this
has been done by many other countries for a good number of years now. The
systems, software and equipment are readily available on the international
market, but the powers that be appear to have set their minds to reject
best practice from elsewhere and, instead, attempt a homegrown system from
scratch.
It is also possible to envisage repeat dispensing by ETP but here again
we have an attempt to produce a homegrown system for little other reason
than that the others were not invented here. Many other countries have
efficient repeat dispensing systems, which function extremely well without
ETP. The Australian system, for example, makes efficient use of pharmacy
computers, works extremely well, and produces major benefits for patients,
pharmacists and prescribers. It also, almost incidentally, handles e-pricing
smoothly and, as a bonus, has good mechanisms for controlling the cost
of prescriptions.
So, why was this ETP pilot designed as it was, what useful purpose is it
meant to serve, where are we going?
R. Gartside
Council election candidate
Caernarfon, Gwynedd |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal