USA Today Article: Inside a pharmacy where a fatal error occurred

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Very disturbing.
 
Walgreens just gave me someone else's prescription (same last name) not two hours ago. They called me within 20 minutes and asked me to bring it back. Funny thing is the pharmacist admitted she realized she had put the wrong prescription into my bag, went to change it, and did the same thing again! I guess she must have been really tired.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm sorry.....that's just a really stupid error. I mean did the pharmacist just blatantly shove the prescription somewhere without looking at it? What kinda pharmacist wouldn't be concerned about a methadone ( as a matter of fact ANY CII) that has ''take as needed" as the sole directions....
And whoever with the sn:keaton2124 at the bottom is just talking a whole bunch of ****. Don't know what's in their stupid brain. Expressing stupid opinions because they think they've got pharmacy operations all figured out because they are a 10-year customer....:idea:
 
Very concerning that the tech typed in a sig not on the rx and the pharmacist didn't really check it. I guess its further proof that retail chains often under train their staff and push pharmacists to hard.
 
Why on earth would the tech write "as needed" as the sole instructions for a drug like that? That seems worse than a simple mistake - I could see accidently taking "qd" to be "qid" or something like that, but how do you read "take 4 tabs twice daily" as "as needed"?

How sad.
 
Yeah that was a pretty bone headed mistake "4T BID" does NOT look anything like "prn"
 
That's awful. At my Walgreens, every C2 that I type is not only reviewed by the pharmacist on the computer before they print it out, but the actual label is also checked against the hard copy before they bag it. Is this just something they do at my store or is it company policy?
 
Studies have shown per 8 hour shift, a single pharmacist should verify max 200-250 scripts. After that, errors increase dramatically.
 
What is the default sig for Methadone at Walgreens? I remember a default sig comes up for almost every drug during data entry... Maybe for some reason the system has prn for methadone or something.
 
It is ultimately the pharmacist's fault but I have never read an article that states the unrealistic demand and pressure patients put on the pharmacy as one of the contributing factors to mis-filled prescriptions.
 
BMBiology said:
It is ultimately the pharmacist's fault but I have never read an article that states the unrealistic demand and pressure patients put on the pharmacy as one of the contributing factors to mis-filled prescriptions.
Click to expand...

http://coaches.aol.com/kids-and-family/feature/_a/five-year-old-took-wrong-medication/20080212115409990001

This article mentions it, but almost solely from the perspective of the pharmacy policies going to great lengths to satisfy patients with speed.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
From the article: Walgreens said, "It's inconceivable that a health care professional making more than $100,000 a year would jeopardize their license to practice in order to influence their bonus by a few hundred dollars."

Inconceivable. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

When I worked at CVS it was always about making sure not to go into the red and to answer the phone on time. I worked at a 24hour store that did 2500-2800 scripts a week. We were chronically understaffed - by both pharmacists and competent techs. I saw numerous med errors in the 5 months that I worked at that store. Yet even with all these problems, district management was all about making sure that they kept volume up so that they could get their bonuses. I never want to work in a store that busy and I have grave reservations about working for CVS or Walgreen's as a pharmacist.
 
Moxxie said:
district management was all about making sure that they kept volume up so that they could get their bonuses.
Click to expand...

I agree. It is often not the pharmacists' bonus but the district managers' bonus that pushes the pharmacy to its limits. It not easy to say no but sometimes, we must do what is right.
 
I've been a methadone-dispensing pharmacist for eleven years now and I really think extra training in methadone is warranted for pharmacists who wish to dispense it. Forty mg bid?? The error aside, I would not have filled the script, and I would have had a chat with the dr.

I mean, given that 50mg is a fatal dose in a non-tolerant person, the script might have been fatal even if it had been dispensed as written and the pt had taken it properly.
 
We got memo's today reminding us not to talk to media
 
AngelaCL said:
Why on earth would the tech write "as needed" as the sole instructions for a drug like that? That seems worse than a simple mistake - I could see accidently taking "qd" to be "qid" or something like that, but how do you read "take 4 tabs twice daily" as "as needed"?

How sad.
Click to expand...
I had the same reaction.
 
Moxxie said:
From the article: Walgreens said, "It's inconceivable that a health care professional making more than $100,000 a year would jeopardize their license to practice in order to influence their bonus by a few hundred dollars."

Inconceivable. I do not think that word means what you think it means.

When I worked at CVS it was always about making sure not to go into the red and to answer the phone on time. I worked at a 24hour store that did 2500-2800 scripts a week. We were chronically understaffed - by both pharmacists and competent techs. I saw numerous med errors in the 5 months that I worked at that store. Yet even with all these problems, district management was all about making sure that they kept volume up so that they could get their bonuses. I never want to work in a store that busy and I have grave reservations about working for CVS or Walgreen's as a pharmacist.
Click to expand...

You nicely summed up working for Walgreens or CVS. What I do not get is why pharmacists put up with it. There are not that many foreign equivalency grads to fill all their positions. If pharmacists refused to work for those companies under those conditions they would have to change.

If Walgreens and CVS's customers knew how much danger they were in because of under staffing and poorly trained staff they are would never get another prescrition filled at either company.
 
AngelaCL said:
Why on earth would the tech write "as needed" as the sole instructions for a drug like that? That seems worse than a simple mistake - I could see accidently taking "qd" to be "qid" or something like that, but how do you read "take 4 tabs twice daily" as "as needed"?

How sad.
Click to expand...

There really isn't enough information in the article to tell exactly how the sig was typed.

"Lewis was supposed to enter Smith's prescription with instructions to take four 10-milligram tablets, twice daily, as the roofer's doctor had instructed. But she acknowledged in her own 2005 deposition she typed directions to take the pills as needed."

From this statement it is impossible to say what exactly was typed on the bottle. I do not think the only instructions were "take the pills as needed." I assume the tech typed take 4 pills by mouth twice daily as needed and the patient somehow construed this as carte blanche to swallow as many pills as he wanted.

Trust me on this, when you have been standing on your feet for 10 hours without a break and have verified 300 prescriptions on your own it is very easy to miss something small like as needed added to the end of a sig.

The take home point to this article and thread should be most retail chain pharmacies are dangerously understaffed. There is a high reliance on technicians who many times do not have the experience or the training to handle the workload. It is a high stress enviroment that is ripe for errors to occur.
 
I predict a progressive state in the future will pass a law limiting Rx verifications for retail pharmacists to 300-350 or so after a string of high profile mistakes & deaths + public outcry, much in the same way some states limit the # of patients assigned to a nurse.

Possible? What do you all think?

Orr...maybe a more likely scenario, guidelines become voluntary after the threat of legislation.
 
A new script for a controlled substance being picked up in at the drive thru all in about 1 minute. That's just not right.
 
Pharmavixen said:
I've been a methadone-dispensing pharmacist for eleven years now and I really think extra training in methadone is warranted for pharmacists who wish to dispense it. Forty mg bid?? The error aside, I would not have filled the script, and I would have had a chat with the dr.

I mean, given that 50mg is a fatal dose in a non-tolerant person, the script might have been fatal even if it had been dispensed as written and the pt had taken it properly.
Click to expand...

i'm going to go with this....i've now read two articles in this thread about errors and fatalities related to methadone.
it IS a particularly dangerous drug....maybe there should be some increased training/more restrictive access?
 
tussionex said:
i'm going to go with this....i've now read two articles in this thread about errors and fatalities related to methadone.
it IS a particularly dangerous drug....maybe there should be some increased training/more restrictive access?
Click to expand...
I don't think we carry Methadone at all. Maybe the pharmacists don't want to be bothered with it. I've had to refer people to a Methadone clinic before.
 
Who takes 22 pills of anything in a 36 hour period?

Sure the sig was wrong and the company is at fault, but I wish more people would take responsibility for their own actions.
 
acetyl said:
Who takes 22 pills of anything in a 36 hour period?

Sure the sig was wrong and the company is at fault, but I wish more people would take responsibility for their own actions.
Click to expand...

Lots of doctors write for patients to take 1-2 tablets Vicodin q-4-6h, which is up to 18 in a 36 hour period. It's possible the patient was used to taking less potent painkillers on a schedule similar to that and thought methadone would be the same.
 
AngelaCL said:
Lots of doctors write for patients to take 1-2 tablets Vicodin q-4-6h, which is up to 18 in a 36 hour period. It's possible the patient was used to taking less potent painkillers on a schedule similar to that and thought methadone would be the same.
Click to expand...

Exactly. I see this all the time. If a patient actually took it by the clock they would consume 12 tablets in 24 hours. The max dose per of Vicodin per day is 8 based on the Tylenol content. I always counsel patients on this and explain not to use other products containing Tylenol and not to exceed 8 tabs per day. I also make sure I document on the rx I counseled the patient.

This brings us back to the under staffed over worked pharmacies. In an appropriately staffed pharmacy the pharmacist would have had time to properly verify the rx and counsel the patient. Having time to counsel and educate the patient is an excellent way to catch and prevent errors. It might have prevented this error or at least absolved the pharmacist of responsibility if she properly documented counseling the patient.

To you and me it sounds simple. If this particular Walgreens added another pharmacist and increased their tech staff by 20% they would have saved money in the long run verse paying a wrongful death settlement. Walgreens and CVS have a huge legal staff whose job it is to analysis this stuff. I know for a fact they have done research comparing staffing levels verse lawsuit payouts. What they found is they make more money understaffing their pharmacies, paying the occasional lawsuit than they would if they staffed all their pharmacies at an appropriate level.


In the corporate pharmacy world it is 100% about the money. They do not care about the pharmacists and they certainly do not care about the patients. Its a business and its all about the money and the script count, nothing else matters.
 
MountainPharmD said:
In the corporate pharmacy world it is 100% about the money. They do not care about the pharmacists and they certainly do not care about the patients. Its a business and its all about the money and the script count, nothing else matters.
Click to expand...
You forgot about customer service. They always push for it, but they have a lot of pharmacies that aren't staffed for it. Customer service ties into the OTC stuff- including Tylenol.
 
tussionex said:
i'm going to go with this....i've now read two articles in this thread about errors and fatalities related to methadone.
it IS a particularly dangerous drug....maybe there should be some increased training/more restrictive access?
Click to expand...
I don't know much about American drug legislation. Here in Ontario, a doctor needs a special license to prescribe methadone after taking a course. Pharmacies don't need a license to dispense it, but I would support this.

Compared with Percocet (similar to Vicodan, its evil twin), methadone has a slow onset of action and a half-life exceeding 24 hours in most people, taking several days to reach steady-state. Overdoses have occurred when patients have taken sublethal doses 24 hours apart for 3 consecutive days.

From the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario Methadone guidelines http://www.cpso.on.ca/Publications/MethGuideNov05revOct07.pdf

The reported death rate of 1.7 per 1,000 is substantially higher than that of other common medications. In a review of the mortality rate from NSAIDS, tricyclic antidepressants, and phenytoin, only one study with a mortality rate approaching methadone could be found (elderly rheumatoid arthritis patients taking prednisone and NSAIDS without cytoprotection).
Click to expand...

The risk of death is higher still in new methadone patients who haven't yet built up a tolerance. (Some old addicts have an astounding tolerance. One of my patients is on 200mg methadone daily, and he admitted to me one day, suffering from back pain, that he'd bought a Duragesic patch on the street and eaten it. I told him "People die doing that, Joe." He nodded and replied, "It was really effective.")

By law (in Ontario), if I receive a methadone script, I have to verify where the person's last dose was unless it's an initiating dose of 10-30 mg daily. So I wouldn't dispense a script for 40 mg bid to a methadone-naive patient. If I saw a script like that, I'd assume the doc made a mistake.
 
fenixtnlfan said:
Walgreens just gave me someone else's prescription (same last name) not two hours ago. They called me within 20 minutes and asked me to bring it back. Funny thing is the pharmacist admitted she realized she had put the wrong prescription into my bag, went to change it, and did the same thing again! I guess she must have been really tired.
Click to expand...


My name is very common...practically Jane Doe. They gave me a prescription of someone else with my same name once too. Luckily I noticed it was the wrong address.
 
acetyl said:
Who takes 22 pills of anything in a 36 hour period?

Sure the sig was wrong and the company is at fault, but I wish more people would take responsibility for their own actions.
Click to expand...

Ive dispensed more.

Today, Oxycodone 5mg

Sig reads: 2-3 tabs q2-3 hours as needed.

(36 tablets in 24 hours)

Weve been doing this for a while for this particular patient. Patient is in hospice with terminal cancer and is suspected to go any day. Freaks my techs out everytime they get one of those scripts which is about every week.
 
I just watched these on youtube the other night and found them to be very interesting, and scary. The thought of mistakes like these terrifies me, I'm years off being a pharmacist but even now the mere thought of something horrible happening really bothers me.

20/20 Investigation on Pharmacy Mistakes
pt. 1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=cT5GJL0tEto

pt. 2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=TxT8Gb4tp1I
 
Most Saturdays at our CVS, we would only have a single pharmacist working a 12 hour shift, and he or she would fill upwards of 600 scripts a day.

Now, they've finally got floaters coming in to help out.
 
This is just the typical excrement we hear about all the time.

Don't get me wrong. My heart goes out to all those who have experienced the tragic consequences of a medical error.

However, it's time the public recognizes that pointing a finger at any individual clerk, technician, pharmacist, etc. is not the answer.

Working conditions at most retail pharmacies are unacceptable. Stores are perpetually understaffed, and employees are overworked. Frequently, the clerks and technicians are more a liability than a resource; many are too immature and uneducated to assume a role of such responsibility. Shifts are too long, and breaks are often sacrificed; pharmacists have to fight for a half-hour lunch. And the prescription verification timers place an inappropriate emphasis on speed, when safety should be the foremost concern.

It's all about money. Corporations like CVS, Rite-Aid, and Walgreens, operate their pharmacies with as little support as possible, while placing undue pressure on the pharmacist to verify an unreasonable volume of prescriptions. This situation is not going to change until legislators take action.

Pharmacists (any medical professionals, really) should not be permitted to work more than 8 hours at a time, and they should have to log two 15-minute breaks and a half-hour lunch for each 8-hour shift. During a given 8-hour shift, a pharmacist should not be allowed to verify more than 225 prescriptions. Clerks should be at least eighteen with a GED/Diploma. Technicians should be at least eighteen with a GED/Diploma, and should be required to pass the CPhT examination within six months as a condition of continued employment/licensure. Prescription verification timers should be eliminated.

In addition to poor working conditions, there is also an issue with failure to utilize technology to its potential. It's the 21st century, and we still tolerate handwritten, faxed, and dictated prescriptions, despite extensive research that indicates that electronic prescribing is much safer. Prescriptions should be entirely electronic, transmitted via a secure Web connection directly from the prescriber to the pharmacy.

People such as the families featured in these videos could help achieve such positive changes by using some of the money won in settlements to establish foundations to promote public awareness of pharmacy errors, and to lobby politicians to act. Instead, most of them are just greedy, selfish opportunists looking to profit from misfortune. Take, for example, the woman who was awarded $21 million for damage inflicted to her daughter. That case stopped being about her daughter as soon as she filed the suit. I'd bet her first acts were to buy an expensive new home and car. And if she worked, I'll bet she doesn't anymore. People like this just want to point fingers and cash the check; they couldn't care less about addressing the real problem. Aside from purchasing a larger mansion, there's nothing $21 million will do for this family that $3 million wouldn't. Bring on tort reform!
 
pharmdch said:
People such as the families featured in these videos could help achieve such positive changes by using some of the money won in settlements to establish foundations to promote public awareness of pharmacy errors, and to lobby politicians to act. Instead, most of them are just greedy, selfish opportunists looking to profit from misfortune.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute, why should the victims lobby politicians? Shouldn't pharmacists, like yourself, be the ones? When was the last time you wrote a letter to your congressman or complain to the board of pharmacy?

Conditions are bad mainly because most pharmacists are not speaking out against them. But I guess as long as these corporations shove $100,000 down their pockets, they are satisfied. So please, unless you have acted, don't expect others to fight your battle.
 
BMBiology said:
Wait a minute, why should the victims lobby politicians? Shouldn't pharmacists, like yourself, be the ones? When was the last time you wrote a letter to your congressman or complain to the board of pharmacy?

Conditions are bad mainly because most pharmacists are not speaking out against them. But I guess as long as these corporations shove $100,000 down their pockets, they are satisfied. So please, unless you have acted, don't expect others to fight your battle.
Click to expand...

I agree that pharmacists have a responsibility to act, but so do the patients. Politicians can easily dismiss our comments as self-interest; we're hardly the most impartial group to promote better working conditions for our own profession. We need the public's help to get their attention. People touched by these tragedies should be sharing their story with any congressman who will listen.
 
pharmdch said:
Politicians can easily dismiss our comments as self-interest.
Click to expand...

Not entirely true. For example, nurses have organized and fought back and won. Things will not change unless pharmacists not only fight back but also lead the fight.
 
Perhaps, but nurses are a much larger lobby than pharmacists. And, I wouldn't necessarily say that they, on average, enjoy working conditions any better than ours.

Political lobbying generally takes lots of time and lots of money. I just don't believe we have enough pharmacists with the time and money to commit to such an objective on any grand scale. I think you're correct that there is an element of disinterest among many pharmacists who are just happy to collect their paycheck and go home. These people who have collected awards in the tens of millions, however, certainly have the time and the money. And there's no shortage of such victims. If they would band together, they could easily raise one-hundred million dollars to establish a foundation to address these problems. At least it would be a start. But most of them would rather spend their blood-money on luxuries and a life of leisure rather than helping to ensure that the same fate doesn't befall another person.
 
Such a scary story. I guess the way to avoid this like this is always telling the patient what the max they can take is. Everytime I consult on a pain med, I clearly tell the patient that "as needed" means you can take LESS than the frequency stated in the direction, but NEVER MORE. I even write the max dose down BIG BIG BIG on their bag. Hopefully, none of this will happen to any of us.
 
I am not going to go back and forth any further but I think it is silly to expect people, who got their lives shattered as a result of a pharmacist's mistake, to lead a fight for better working conditions for pharmacists because pharmacists don't have the time or money to fight for their own cause. I don't agree with that logic.
 
BMBiology said:
I am not going to go back and forth any further but I think it is silly to expect people, who got their lives shattered as a result of a pharmacist's mistake, to lead a fight for better working conditions for pharmacists because pharmacists don't have the time or money to fight for their own cause. I don't agree with that logic.
Click to expand...

I, too, have grown weary of this dialogue, so this will be my final entry.

It isn't about asking them to fight our battle, or to improve our conditions. Improving our working conditions is merely a means to help achieve the desired result: fewer needless deaths or injuries resulting from pharmacy errors. It's about them doing something positive with the money they've received. It's about something bigger than themselves. Personally, if I had a child who was permanently incapacitated by a medical error, and I won a $20 million settlement, I'd gladly spend the majority of the money in an effort to save others from suffering the same fate. It isn't about them being advocates for pharmacists; it's about being advocates for other patients.
 
BMBiology said:
Not entirely true. For example, nurses have organized and fought back and won. Things will not change unless pharmacists not only fight back but also lead the fight.
Click to expand...


i agree. nurses have organized very successfully!

pharmacists really have to do the same if they ever expect to get anywhere with lobbying for better working conditions and, hopefully but don't bet on it, more respect.

too bad most pharmacists are way to passive to do so.
 
The Chicago area Walgreens Pharmacists did strike a few years ago over working conditions. It didn't work because they felt striking for long periods of time was wrong. Also, there was no public sympathy because they thought, incorrectly, the issue was about money.
 
pharmdch said:
This is just the typical excrement we hear about all the time.

Don't get me wrong. My heart goes out to all those who have experienced the tragic consequences of a medical error.

However, it's time the public recognizes that pointing a finger at any individual clerk, technician, pharmacist, etc. is not the answer.

Working conditions at most retail pharmacies are unacceptable. Stores are perpetually understaffed, and employees are overworked. Frequently, the clerks and technicians are more a liability than a resource; many are too immature and uneducated to assume a role of such responsibility. Shifts are too long, and breaks are often sacrificed; pharmacists have to fight for a half-hour lunch. And the prescription verification timers place an inappropriate emphasis on speed, when safety should be the foremost concern.

It's all about money. Corporations like CVS, Rite-Aid, and Walgreens, operate their pharmacies with as little support as possible, while placing undue pressure on the pharmacist to verify an unreasonable volume of prescriptions. This situation is not going to change until legislators take action.

Pharmacists (any medical professionals, really) should not be permitted to work more than 8 hours at a time, and they should have to log two 15-minute breaks and a half-hour lunch for each 8-hour shift. During a given 8-hour shift, a pharmacist should not be allowed to verify more than 225 prescriptions. Clerks should be at least eighteen with a GED/Diploma. Technicians should be at least eighteen with a GED/Diploma, and should be required to pass the CPhT examination within six months as a condition of continued employment/licensure. Prescription verification timers should be eliminated.

In addition to poor working conditions, there is also an issue with failure to utilize technology to its potential. It's the 21st century, and we still tolerate handwritten, faxed, and dictated prescriptions, despite extensive research that indicates that electronic prescribing is much safer. Prescriptions should be entirely electronic, transmitted via a secure Web connection directly from the prescriber to the pharmacy.

People such as the families featured in these videos could help achieve such positive changes by using some of the money won in settlements to establish foundations to promote public awareness of pharmacy errors, and to lobby politicians to act. Instead, most of them are just greedy, selfish opportunists looking to profit from misfortune. Take, for example, the woman who was awarded $21 million for damage inflicted to her daughter. That case stopped being about her daughter as soon as she filed the suit. I'd bet her first acts were to buy an expensive new home and car. And if she worked, I'll bet she doesn't anymore. People like this just want to point fingers and cash the check; they couldn't care less about addressing the real problem. Aside from purchasing a larger mansion, there's nothing $21 million will do for this family that $3 million wouldn't. Bring on tort reform!
Click to expand...

Amen to that!
 
BMBiology said:
I am not going to go back and forth any further but I think it is silly to expect people, who got their lives shattered as a result of a pharmacist's mistake, to lead a fight for better working conditions for pharmacists because pharmacists don't have the time or money to fight for their own cause. I don't agree with that logic.
Click to expand...

You are completely missing the point. The point is everyone involved in getting a prescription needs to also be involoved in improving the process. Victims make the best agents of change. Who better to lobby for improvement to the system then someone who has been harmed by it.

All of the major legislation regulating prescription drugs to include the creation of the FDA have been brought about because the public was harmed by unsafe practices.
 
It is not that we don't welcome any help but I think it is ridiculous to expect others to fight for us because the poster believe pharmacists don't have the "money and time". How can we expect others to fight for us when we refuse to even join them? Most pharmacists make $100,000+ for a 40 hour per week work, but yet, we dont have the money and time to do something about it? That's noneless.
 
BMBiology said:
It is not that we don't welcome any help but I think it is ridiculous to expect others to fight for us because the poster believe pharmacists don't have the "money and time". How can we expect others to fight for us when we refuse to even join them? Most pharmacists make $100,000+ for a 40 hour per week work, but yet, we dont have the money and time to do something about it? That's noneless.
Click to expand...

I appreciate your comments but you are still missing the point. They are not fighting for us. They would be fighting for a safer and better system that reduces the chances of a serious error happening. This would benefit the patient. Pharmacists would also indirectly benefit from this because any changes would likely improve our working conditions.

In addition to this pharmacists also need to take a stand and demand better and safer working conditions. This is a battle no one can fight but us. Change will only happen if everyone demands it. This is an excellent topic to discuss on here. We, as pharmacists, need to do something. The million dollar questions is not just what but how.
 
Mountain Dewd- you're right. Patients will not fight for changes to a health care system unless the system adversely affects them. Take the MD resident stuff for example. Residents used to be on call crazy, crazy long hours before someone decided that it was a bad idea for a doctor to be awake 36 hours straight. Who does the doctor at a hospital work for? The patients. The patients were adversely affected by doctors who were tired- malpractice if you will.

When patients start realizing that pharmacists are not as proficient when they are highly stressed or overworked, they will stop complaining about 30 minute wait times, etc.

Dennis Quaid is attacking the drug company who manufactured the Heparin. Maybe patients will start attacking the companies that force pharmacists to work under these conditions, not necessarily the pharmacists themselves. I highly doubt that the pharmacist on duty during this Methadone case wanted to inadvertently kill the patient.
 
One more thing- patients do not realize what is involved when a pharmacist fills a prescription. I've heard the "you only have to slap a label on the Nasonex, so why do I have to wait 30 minutes for it?" a hundred times. Hell, a lot of pre-pharm students do not even realize what goes on behind the counter.

As a group, pharmacists could start public advertisements to educate the general public about the process behind filling prescriptions. It could work, but advertising costs money. If patients had a better understanding of what went on behind the pharmacy counter, they would probably be more patient, understanding, and sympathetic to the situation because it's their medicine that's being dispensed.

Some of my patients understand the process. They'll bring empty bottles in and ask for us to fax their doctors- knowing full well that the faxes will not be received until the next day or later. Other patients will hover around the pick-up counter- knowing full well that what they do just adds to the stress of the pharmacy staff. In those peoples' minds, they think: the more stress that I put on the pharmacy staff--> the faster they will fill my medicine--> the faster that I can get home to watch tv, etc.
 
BMBiology said:
It is not that we don't welcome any help but I think it is ridiculous to expect others to fight for us because the poster believe pharmacists don't have the "money and time". How can we expect others to fight for us when we refuse to even join them? Most pharmacists make $100,000+ for a 40 hour per week work, but yet, we dont have the money and time to do something about it? That's noneless.
Click to expand...

Which do you think will be more effective:

A pharmacist making $100k a year saying that they should be doing less work and getting more breaks to do a better job

or

A widow and mother holding up a picture of her deceased husband asking why ****ty working conditions and corporate greed led to her husband's death.

or both of them working together to invoke change?

Your argument is a fallacy, no one said they expect her to do anything, nor did anyone say they expect her to do the fighting for us. What people are saying is that the greater the number of voices crying out for change, the more likely it is to get the ball rolling.

That said, even as just a technician, that script would have raised red flags and I wouldn't have input it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

R
USA Today Article. Please read!
Replies
5
Views
896
mentos
mentos
L
CVS is closing pharmacies inside some target stores
Replies
11
Views
2K
nampa
N
P
Pharmacy is a sinking ship all over the world UK article
Replies
2
Views
893
projektreverb
P
R
I actually witnessed a dumpster fire at Walgreens today!
Replies
6
Views
1K
RxPreceptor
RxPreceptor
sunnyandseventytwo
For all you pharmacists working retail today
Replies
4
Views
1K
RxPreceptor
RxPreceptor
Top