[log in to unmask],Net writes:
>Not heard this one, but the problem is that 10% or more of
>prescriptions are never 'cashed', so it's no good our computers
>talking to theirs. It would have to be pharmacists.
WHat proportion of Pharmacies are not storing dispensed items on
computer?
It occurs to me again, how very odd it is that with each prescription
item liable to have a unique ID in our databases, the security number
is printed onto the FP10 before we get it, and was not implemented as a
per item unique ID.
If I decided to print a unique ID on each item of my prescriptions,
what format would be suitable?
My prescriber number, followed by a sequential number, or perhaps
using the date or the PPA dictionary number for the preparation to
reduce the number of digits needed?
I think I would prefer not to put any part of the patient ID into such
a number, although of course this goes to newcastle anyway at present.
SO, the Pharmacy enters the unique ID for each item I prescribe - and
the patient presents to them for dispensing - along with whatever else
they want to enter and by all means using OCR or barcoding - and then
that goes to the PPA for integration....
or perhaps the integration occurs at the pharmacy or PCG level....
and only the integrated data travels up to the PPA.
Pharmacy|GP|UID
Looking at the FP10, if one uses a suitable font there is plenty of
space to add a UID. In fact I am more and more inclined to go over to
one item per FP10 form, thus leaving an enormous amount of greenspace
to use as one might like.
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|