Home > Views > Blogs > Daily Brief > Prescription Pad Pandemonium
EMAIL
PRINT
RSS
SHARE
TEXT SIZE:
SHARE
Send a copy to me

Separate multiple email addresses (max 20) with commas.

0/1500
Letters are not case-sensitive, disregard spaces.
captcha image
Try a New One
This helps us prevent automated registrations and spamming.

Main
The Redcoats Are Coming   Speculative Dealmaking
Jul 19 2007 6:00AM EDT

Prescription Pad Pandemonium


Doctors looking for information on what kind of pad to use when writing prescriptions for Medicaid patients should look no further than -- where else? -- the latest emergency spending bill for Iraq.

In true Washington fashion, it seems that legislators included a little surprise for many doctors in an amendment to the latest Iraq bill. Effective October 1, all Medicaid prescriptions must be written on tamper-resistant pads. Pharmacists who fill a prescription that isn't written on such a pad will not be reimbursed by the Medicaid program.

Several states already require such pads, but the new law is a surprise to many doctors, according to the Associated Press. And with the October 1 deadline not far off, some fear that plenty of doctors won't be prepared.

Small pharmacies are concerned that they will either have to turn away Medicaid patients or face financial consequences if the government refuses to reimburse them. The bill's language does not include guidance on just what exactly a tamper-proof prescription pad is.

The law is meant to deter patients from obtaining illegal prescriptions, which would save the government money. But the National Association of Chain Drug Stores says this could lead to higher Medicaid costs with increased emergency room visits and hospitalizations if patients are denied their medications.

The Congressional Budget Office projected that the requirement would save taxpayers $355 million over the coming decade.

There's no telling how the government will spend that extra $35.5 million per year it will save from the headache-inducing tamper-resistant pad requirement.

That detail was left out of the $120 billion war spending bill.


by Megan Barnett

See more in

Loading...

Add Your Comment

Required fields are marked with an asterisk (*)
Add a comment

Recent Blog Posts

Archive

Previous
Aug
2008
Next


Also in Portfolio.com
Most Read
Most Emailed
Recently Commented