patient requested

[howe928]

1) patient requested to put all prescribed items for different family members into a same bag
2) patient requested prescribed items to be delivered by hand after delivery driver has gone home
3) patient requested to use your toilet
4) patient requested you to dispense shop pack of co-codamol easy to swallow caplets

will you or give okay to your staff to do that?

[Fleegle]

This may help.

Journal of the American Pharmacists Association: JAPhA, January 2009 by Charles Daniels, Jan D. Hirsch, Nancy Nguyen, Austin Oen, Suzie Robertson
Summary: Objectives: To assess the rate of patient-requested pharmacist counseling for refill prescriptions and satisfaction with pick-up process for patients using an automated prescription delivery system (APDS) versus those using a regular pick-up counter and to explore patient willingness to use an APDS as a tool for pharmacist monitoring of medication therapy outcomes. Methods: In this uncontrolled, cross-sectional, survey study, we assessed use of APDS or the regular counter by 116 patients picking up refill prescriptions at two community pharmacies. The main outcome measures were number of patients requesting pharmacist counseling for refill prescriptions, patient satisfaction with pick-up process, and patient willingness to use an APDS to report medication therapy outcomes. Results: None of the regular counter users and only two APDS users (3.7%) requested counseling for their refill prescription (P = 0.126). Almost all patients agreed that they were able to talk to a pharmacist about their prescription if they wanted to do so (95.1% regular counter and 92.3% APDS; P = 0.268). The majority (75%) of patients using APDS indicated that they would be willing to use the system to answer questions or perform simple tests to provide information that the pharmacist could use to improve medication effectiveness or reduce adverse effects. Conclusion: Very few patients (ADPS or regular counter) asked to speak to a pharmacist about their refill medications, although it appeared that, no perceived barriers to pharmacist access existed. Most APDS patients were willing to use this new technology to provide information about therapy outcomes to the pharmacist. Further exploration and testing of the APDS as a data collection tool to enhance pharmacist access to therapy outcomes is warranted.ABSTRACT FROM AUTHORCopyright of Journal of the American Pharmacists Association: JAPhA is the property of American Pharmaceutical Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.

Excerpt from Article: RESEARCH NOTES

Patient request for pharmacist counseling and satisfaction: Automated prescription delivery system versus regular pick-up counter
Jan D. Hirsch, Austin Oen, Suzie Robertson, Nancy Nguyen, and Charles Daniels

Abstract
) iissess ihc ralr of p;ili('nl,-rr(|iiosU'(l pharinaclsl couiiscling for refill prescriptions and siUisfuclion witli pick-up process for patients using an automated prescription (lellvorv' system (APDS) versus those using a regular piek-iip counter and lo explore patient v\illi!iguess lo use an APDS as a tool for pharmaeist monilorine of medication therapy outcomes. Methods: in this uncontroiled, cross-sectional, survey siu(i\. we assessed use of Ai'DS or the regular counter by I Ifi [Kitients pi( king up reflil prescriplions at two cnuimunlty pharmacies. The main outcome measures were numher of patients requesting pharmacist counseling for refiii prescriptions, patient satisfaction with pick-u|) process, aiut patient wliiiiigness to use au Ai'liS to report medication tiierap> outcomes. Results: Mone oi the regular counter users aud oniy two APDS users (3.7%) requested counseling for their refiii prescriplitm (/'= 0. i 2(i). Almost aii patients agreed that tliey were able to talk to a i)harmacist about Iheir prescripMon If Ihey wanted lo do so (itril'Wi regular counter aud 92.3% APDS; P = 0.268), Ihe malority (irm) of patients using APDS indicated that they would be wiliing to use the system to answer questions or [)erform simple lestw lo provide information that the pharuiacist couid use to improve medi(ation elTectiveness or reduce adverse effects. Convlusiott: Very few patients (ADPS or regular counter) asked to speak to a pharmacist about their refiii medications, although it appeared tiiat no lerceived barriers to pharmacisl access existed. Most \PDS patients were willing to use this new lechnoiog> to provide information about therapy outcomes to Ihe pharmacist. P'tirther exploration and testing of the APDS as a dala coileclioii tool to euliaucc ()harmacist access to therapy outcomes is warrauled. keywoftSs: Automation, patient satisfaction, technology. <'ouuseling(patienl). 7.4m Phatw \ssov. 2009:49:73-77. doi: 10. i:i31/JAPh.\.2()09.080a7

n aniomated prescription deliver>' s>'stem (APi)S) is a new tecimoiogy. simiiar to an automated teller machine X x(ATM). thai can be eiectronicail> integrated with a pharmacy's managemenl system, allowing [)atients to use a password to pay for and pick up their refill prescriptions alter the normal pharmacisl dispensing and veriilcation process iias been compieted.' The (laiifornia lioarti of Pharmacy approved the use of APDS on Januar>' 2(i. 2007. i)ul use on a case-bycase basis via a waiver s>'stem has heen allowed since October 2004.' key requirements were thai APDS be used for previously dis|>ensed prescriplions oniy. thai ine [Kjlienl pnivide written conseiil expressing desire lo use APDS. and tbat tbe APDS be located adjacent to tbe secure pharmacy area. In addilion. tbe regulation specified tbat APDS should nol he usfd if Ibe pharmacist determines Ibat a patient should be (ounseled on the (iispensed mcdi( alion and that the pharmac> inusl pnni(ic an immediate consuitiilioii witii a |>barmacist (in ixTson or via teiephonel if tiie patieul so requests. Tra(lilionall>. pharmatisl contad bas been laciliialed Ihrougb Ihe pi'<'S(ripti(ni pick-up process when a cieik alerts

Jan D. Hirsch, PhD, is an Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacy, Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmacoutical Sciences, University of Californiji, San Diego, La Jolla. CA. Austin Oen, PharmD, was Student Pharmacist, Skaggs iichocl of Pharmac.v and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Univursity of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA, at the time this study was condU[:ted; he is currently Pharriacist, Shiirii Mi-morial Hospital, San Diego, CA. Suzie Robertson, PharmD, wa:; Studont Phiirmacist, School of Pharmacy. University of Californiii. San Francisco, at the time this study was conducted; she is. currently Clinical Specialist-Proiluct Analyst. Cardinal Health, San Diego, CA. Nancy Nguyen, PharmD, was Resident, IVIedical Center, University of California. San Diego, at the titne thi;; study was conducted; she is currently Pha' macist. Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles. Charles Daniels, PhD, is Pharmacist in Chief, Medii;al Center, Univeisitx' of California, San Diego, and Professor of Clinical Pharmacy, Skag(]. School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Scionces, r^jitv cf California, San Diego, La .)olla. CA. Correspondence: Jan D. Hirsch, PhD, Skaggs School ot Phar macy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California. San Diogo, 9500 Gilman Dr., Mail Code 0714, La Jolla, CA 92093-0714. Fax: 858-822-6857. E-mail: ianhirscht^'ucsd.-idu Disclosure: The authors declare no conflicts of interest or financial intei ests in any product or service mentioned in this; article, including grants, employment, gifts, stock holdings, or honoraria. I Funding: Supported in part by a grant from the GCRC Pro gram, MOI RROO827. National Center for Research Resources, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

1 ,.( t l i e

Am

Fh.

73

[DavidS]

This abstract explains clearly the difference between irony and sarcasm.

[SolomonQ]

1) patient requested to put all prescribed items for different family members into a same bag
2) patient requested prescribed items to be delivered by hand after delivery driver has gone home
3) patient requested to use your toilet
4) patient requested you to dispense shop pack of co-codamol easy to swallow caplets

will you or give okay to your staff to do that?

1. No, sorry
2. No!!!!!!
3. No!!!!!!
4. Sure

[Defblade]

1) patient requested to put all prescribed items for different family members into a same bag
2) patient requested prescribed items to be delivered by hand after delivery driver has gone home
3) patient requested to use your toilet
4) patient requested you to dispense shop pack of co-codamol easy to swallow caplets

will you or give okay to your staff to do that?

1) Yes.
2) Depends (where, why, my perception of urgency of medication)
3) Depends (on where loo is ad how to get there. Also - much more likely to be a child who may produce a puddle for us to clear up otherwise).
4) Depends. Mostly on price.

[bobbin]

1) patient requested to put all prescribed items for different family members into a same bag
2) patient requested prescribed items to be delivered by hand after delivery driver has gone home
3) patient requested to use your toilet
4) patient requested you to dispense shop pack of co-codamol easy to swallow caplets

will you or give okay to your staff to do that?

1. Yes, unless I had reason to believe that they would get confused.

2. Only under exceptional circumstances.

3. Only if the toilet was in an area of the building which was accessible without entering private areas of the pharmacy.

4. Yes, unless they wanted a 'fancy' brand - in which case they would have to make a purchase.

[johnep]

In CMK had a toilet available but had to close it after needles and syringes left there.
johnep