November 7, 2007
Thanks to all of you who took the time to respond to my e-prescribingblog.
It is clear from your responses that you definitely feel that pharmacyshould not, and cannot, afford to bear the burden of the expense of this technology.
I have to tell you that I was surprised to hear from many of you about mistakesM.D.s have made using this technology. This alarms me even more in that one ofthe primary advantages of this technology is that it should be a more accurateand reliable means of communicating the prescriber's choice of medication(s) tothe pharmacy.
If you have a topic that you would like your colleagues to respondto, please let me know I can be reached at email@example.com.
I look forward to hearing your thoughts on my next topic: Pharmacists' influenceon Rx drug sales, which are likely to double by 2012, while the pharma industrycontinues to ignore them.
Is this yet another situation where pharmacists unwillingly will bear the expense of this very much needed technology?
It is my understanding that there is a major multiorganizational initiative which includes both the NACDS, NCPA, and others whose goal is to convert all prescribing to an electronic-based platform by the end of 2010 With 2007 coming to a close, it seems that it will be a tough task to complete in three years.
So why is it that with dispensing costs running in the range of $10 to 14 per Rx and plan-sponsored dispensing fees as low as $4 that pharmacy should be required to absorb fees (some providers require a subscription fee + transaction fee for each Rx) associated with this technology initiative?
If you ask the e-prescribing suppliers what are the advantages to e-prescribing, here are some of the benefits they list:
I look forward to your comments and insights on how you feel e-prescribing will impact you and your colleagues.