Frequently Asked Questions

The law does not allow the practitioner to abbreviate, the month must be written out. For example, “December” not “Dec.”

The patient should not be inconvenienced by this new requirement. Hopefully, consumers themselves, when presented with a prescription that is illegible will clarify the drug, dosage strength or other component of the prescription with the doctor before taking it to the pharmacy.

The purpose of the law is to improve patient safety by reducing errors in prescription medications. The law does not specify how the Department shall handle prescription writers who do not comply. The Department will work closely with the licensing boards, health care associations, and other interested groups to implement this law. As with all new laws and programs, we cannot predict what will happen in every situation, however, the Department is now focused on how best to implement the law not on how to discipline health care providers who are doing their best to learn and acclimate to this new prescription format. The Department focus the first year is to educate prescribing practitioners, pharmacists and consumers about the law. The licensing boards have a variety of options available to deal with violations, including a letter of advice that would be sent to non-compliant practitioners. This would be followed by a notice of non-compliance, and if appropriate, a citation. The licensing boards have not yet had the opportunity to address this issue.

The pharmacist, as a practice standard, has always had the responsibility of verifying an illegible prescription with the physician.

Although the law doesn’t grant specific rulemaking authority, the Board of Pharmacy, at its August meeting, will consider whether or not to draft a rule specifying the standard of practice for pharmacists on how to handle a prescription that does not meet the new requirements.

The law does not prohibit filling a prescription that the pharmacist would otherwise have filled prior to July 1,2003. Keep in mind also that pharmacists, as a routine standard of practice, have always verified with a physician a prescription that was unclear or illegible.

There is no reporting requirement in the law, however, arguably, if a prescription written by a health care practitioner does not meet the requirements it could be viewed as a general violation of the law. Again, for the first year the department’s focus will be educational not punishment.

The pharmacist will handle the script in the same manner as it was handled prior to July 1, 2003. If the pharmacist would have filled the prescription on June 30, then nothing in the law prevents the pharmacist from filling it on July 1.

Any information not contained on the preprinted prescription should be hand printed.

The law does not grant a “grace” period. It went into effect on July 1, 2003. The Department’s focus in the first year will be on education, not punishment.

No. The law applies to a “written prescription for a medicinal drug issued by a health care practitioner licensed by law to prescribe such drug…” A pharmacist is not licensed by law to prescribe drugs.

The law clearly references written prescriptions, not written orders. There is a distinct difference between the two. An order relates to administration; a prescription relates to dispensing. Thus, in our interpretation, the law does not apply to written orders.