[paterfamilias]

“If a drug is prescribed that seems inappropriate to the stated indication, or could endanger a patient, it is the pharmacist’s duty to check, and indeed refuse the prescription if his or her concerns are not satisfied.”

I understand.

However, the intrusion of insurance company-run drug plans where there is usually a non-pharmacy trained clerical staff reviewing doctors’ orders, not having the benefit of medical history, patient interviews or lab data is far different from a neighborhood pharmacist who knows his patient or a hospital Pharm D who makes rounds with the medical team and advises therapeutic options.

It is especially ridiculous when I am advised by the insurance co. drug plan that there are drug-drug interactions when I combine isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutal and pyrizinamide to treat tuberculosis.

That this generates the need for a phone call or faxes is truly idiotic.

[Slings and Arrows]

However, the intrusion of insurance company-run drug plans where there is usually a non-pharmacy trained clerical staff reviewing doctors’ orders, not having the benefit of medical history, patient interviews or lab data is far different from a neighborhood pharmacist who knows his patient or a hospital Pharm D who makes rounds with the medical team and advises therapeutic options.

Strongly agreed.

It is especially ridiculous when I am advised by the insurance co. drug plan that there are drug-drug interactions when I combine isoniazid, rifampin, ethambutal and pyrizinamide to treat tuberculosis.

*facepalm*