Funny things, words. My comment about Patient Registration was based on
totally different idea of what the term seems to convey to others.
I do not need to tell the people on this list that perhaps 8 in 10 scripts
that the doctor signs are for the chronically ill or aged. It is this
majority that typically use their favourite pharmacist for year after year.
It is often this pharmacist that explains some of the intricacies of the
medication - not only the first time, but time and time again. It is this
pharmacist who explains the tablet may have changed shape and colour, but
is still the same drug. Surely this relationship is part of the strength of
community pharmacy?
The Registration, I would foresee, would be a only formalisation of this
commitment, arguably less, and with better safeguards, than the current
commitment entered into by so many patients (and their doctors) for script
collection services. If someone wants to get their script filled somewhere
else, other than their registered pharmacy, fine. Individuals the likes of
me, who rarely have a script, and then fill it from the nearest pharmacy in
their travels are a minority (of patients and scripts). Any design
ultimately should deal with the minorities and possibilities, but the 80:20
rule applies in the beginning. In fact the more I think about it, the more
I query some of the side issues concerning Script Collection. In those
immortal words - What does the panel think?
Martin Strange
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|