Adrian,
> Therefore as far as fraud goes we are talking about
>stopping people who hand alter a digit or add an item. They are
>usually quite obvious, not very expensive, and the reason they are not
>caught is that Pharmacists do not want a major punch-up in their shop.
That's rarely the reason, anyone willing to risk the punch up would probably
not bother with the prescription.
I'm remarkably compliant with the requests of people who point guns at me :(
If we move to a system where GP's aren't allowed to change the quantities on
their computer generated scripts, aren't allowed to add items by hand. It
would be easier. If the law as it is at present was properly applied it
would be even easier. Should I accept the initials of the "drug worker" when
the quantity of dihydrocodeine has been altered? Can I possible know if the
item written in the receptionists hand following the two printed items was
added before or after the GP's signature?
Unless GP's come up with a set of rules, and are willing to stick to them,
then much fraud will remain impossible to detect.
>A technological solution is probably not the right one.
Agreed.
Regards
Jeff Green
Community Locum and Consultant Pharmacist
[log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|