The Annals Summaries of the Latest Medical Research!
home help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


The Annals of Pharmacotherapy: Vol. 26, No. 9, pp. 1149-1155.
© 1992 Harvey Whitney Books Company.
This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Articles Ahead of Print
Right arrow [Order Reprint]
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nichol, M.
Right arrow Articles by Michael, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nichol, M.
Right arrow Articles by Michael, L.


Research Articles

Critical analysis of the content and enforcement of mandatory consultation and patient profile laws

MB Nichol and LW Michael

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the experience of 12 states that mandate that pharmacists provide consult services to patients and maintain drug profiles. DATA SOURCES: An analysis of each state's statutes and regulations was complemented by telephone interviews of state licensing board staff. RESULTS: Nine states specify the information to be provided during consultations, but only one (Florida) requires a comprehensive list of drug information, including adverse drug reactions, drug-drug interactions, directions for use, and necessary warnings. Eleven of the 12 states also require pharmacists to maintain patient drug profiles, but only 6 states specify the type of information to be included in profiles. State efforts to inform consumers about the pharmacist consultation requirement are limited, with only 7 states undertaking minimal promotional programs. The fact that no states reported any consumer consultation complaints or disciplinary actions against pharmacists for failure to consult illustrates the limited nature of mandatory consultation statues and regulations. CONCLUSIONS: The wide variety of requirements demonstrates that these laws do not represent a uniform standard of practice. The lack of documented evidence regarding implementation invites questions regarding their usefulness and reinforces the need for enhanced monitoring activities.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
I. I Puumalainen, J. M Kause, and M. S Airaksinen
Quality Assurance Instrument Focusing on Patient Counseling
Ann. Pharmacother., July 1, 2005; 39(7): 1220 - 1226.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Eval Health ProfHome page
E. C. Paluck, L. W. Green, C. J. Frankish, D. W. Fielding, and B. Haverkamp
Assessment of Communication Barriers in Community Pharmacies
Eval Health Prof, December 1, 2003; 26(4): 380 - 403.
[Abstract] [PDF]




homecopy help contact us subscription past issues search current issue
Copyright © 1992 by Harvey Whitney Books Company.