Posted on 03/08/2006 2:30:35 PM PST by indcons
I mispoke a little bit. An applicant must have all general eduction classes completed and all core science work completed (1 yr of general chemistry, 1 yr of Organic chemistry, 1 yr of calculus, 1 yr of Physics, 1 semester of Human Anatomy, 1 semester of Human Physiology, 1 semester of Human Biology, and 1 semester of Professional Writing.) I went to college and completed 75 hours of pre-professional curriculum. Application can then be made for the pharmacy school (obviously it would be better to stay at the same school.)
Then pharmacy school requires 1500 hours pharmacy internship (public pharmacy, hospital pharmacy, etc.) The curriculum can take up to 4 years to complete. When I applied it was a minimum of six years of education.
Which is why the major chains are cutting deals with kids BEFORE they graduate from pharm school with offers that START them in the 80s to $90s.
Actually, starting wages vary from $49,000 to $67,000. Depending upon the setting of the pharmacy, they can make up to $89,000.
Take pills out of big bottles and put them into little bottles. Software does all the rest.
True. However that does hold down costs and space issues. There are pill counters that are used to count the pills. It takes a lot less space to have a 1000 count bottle of Amoxicillin 250 mg capsules on the shelf, than 500 bottles of Amoxicillin 250 mg capsules in lots of 40 per bottle. Lots more room for error in the second scenario. And thank heavens for software and computers in pharmacy practice. Overlapping prescriptions from doctors, patient shopping for drugs, interactions caught more easily, and full disclosure of side effects of the medication. I worked in a pharmacy to put myself through college, and yes, I did pick up things pretty quickly on the surface. The medications prescribed are usually the same one, so you learn the side effects, etc and should be able to remember them by memory.
Do you have any questions for the pharmacist?, is corporate policy handed down by lawyers. If they're ever sued, they can say, We ASKED if there were any questions.
I would rather be asked that, then try to get someone's attention to ask the question. Patients can really assume things that are not true. I worked with an older pharmacist who dispensed a rectal suppository for nausea. The patient inserted it with the foil on. From them on, the labels said "Remove foil before inserting." I will cut patients slack, they are usually sick and not thinking straight when taking/applying any kind of medication.
And, have you ever asked a pharmacist a question about your medication? They look at the label...and start reading you POSSIBLE side effects.
Nope, never had that experience. Again, if someone is aware enough, they learn the possible side effects quickly and don't have to read them to the customer. If the customer wants to go into depth, that is when the pharmacist can start looking for additional information on the print-out or the PDR. Quite frankly, if I had a pharmacist do that to me, I would take my business elsewhere. I worked with a couple of pharmacists who were lazy and didn't keep up with the latest information. I would never let either one of them fill my prescriptions.
If it weren't for red tape and "tradition" (another word for the trappings of a profession that the profession itself maintains so as to sustain its "mystique"), I truly believe one could learn all one has to know to be a topnotch modern pharmacist in six months, and even that might be too long.
Well, according to your theory, all pharmacists do is put pills from big bottles into little bottles. Actually, that is not correct. Pharmacists work at poison control centers and must understand the interaction of chemicals and drugs. Pharmacists work at hospitals and must package the doctor's request of IV's according to patients age, weight, and condition. Community pharmacists work with doctors in selecting the best possible medication for patients. Pharmacists are the last ones who see those medications that are dispensed, are the last ones that can answer questions, and know the conditions that the medication should treat. One example is a doctor with atrocious handwriting who would prescribe Amoxil 125 mg/5 ml for children. Only his handwriting made it look like Clinoril 125 mg, which is an anti-inflammatory for arthritis patients. A good pharmacist would catch that the patient's age is under 12 years and would ask why a dr would prescribe clinoril for a pediatric patient. The pharmacist is a safeguard for the public, and can spend more time with the patient, answering questions about the medications they have been prescribed. Doctors take 1 class about medications, and then rely on drug salesman for continuing education in many cases.
Did I work with substandard pharmacists? Yes I did. Both were terminated. I didn't go onto pharmacy school because of the late hours and the weekend work that would have been involved. Plus, I really hated working with insurance companies and trying to get reimbursement back. I do miss the interaction with patients and the fascinating abilities of substances to truly help mankind live a healthier life.
You made your arguments well, and moved me a little bit. But not much. But you seem to be such a nice person, I do not want to argue back and forth with you. I say that completely sincerely.
But I must point out one factual error of yours...that may just send you back to your certificate. From '94 to '04, Americans went from under a billion prescriptions to almost a billion and a half. It's expected to rise to 3 billion scrips by 2010--aging population, prescription programs, etc. That is why pharmacists are in such demand. And the salary range I gave you is from a very recent article in the Wall Street Journal.
If you decide to go back, let me know. I'll come in to get some nose drops or something, just to chat you up.
Safe travel.
What I want to know is this:
Have the "notes" field always been printing on the receipt? Is it store-dependent? Did this just get implemented?
I can imagine the shock if one store sets up their machines to _not_ print out the notes field just for this reason, and then enter notes on that basis, but another store sets up their machines _to_ print them out. THAT can cause a lot of trouble.
Likewise, if a previously "hidden" field gets made "available" as the result of a chain-wide software implementation (or as the result of a law), these sorts of things are bound to happen.
Something similar to this situation happened in a restaurant in my neighborhood. The waiters, trying to keep track of orders, rather than labeling tables 1, 2 or 3, chose to write descriptions of customers with such polite terms as "Jew boy, "fat chick," etc. Predictably, these notes were accidentally printed out on the checks and all hell broke loose. The restaurant closed several months later.
And for those who think this is proper professional behavior, "psycho" and "crazy" are not psychiatric terms.
I had an experience at a drug store, where the pharmacy tech decided to characterize my illness and medications outloud where anyone could here. I was speechless! I later called and complained to the pharmacist, and he didn't apologize. So, I go to the pharmacy across the street, and they have lost out on HUNDREDS of dollars. :)
here=hear... apologies
Seems more like a personal opionon rather than a medical condition. If they wrote "Suffers from depression and acute bipolar disorder" that would be a violation, but saying, "This lady is crazy and psycho" doesn't seem to me to raise to the level of a violation.
I may be wrong, but it seems that a HIPAA violation would be hard to prove.
Didn't she, by permitting her friend to pick up the medication, provide voluntary disclosure to her friend.
It is reasonable to assume the friend would read the scripts and figure out what was wrong with her.
Plus the term crazy and psycho are not medical terms as I understand it, so is there really a disclosure?
Psycho is slang for psychotic. It is a disclosure.
definition:
psychotic- adj. Of, relating to, or affected by psychosis.
n. A person affected by psychosis.
The word psycho has also attained a common usage definition that means mean or easily pissed off. I think this is more likely the usage intended.
I believe any competent lawyer could argue this point. I have called people psycho in the past, often meaning they have gone off the deep end in anger or they are doing something very stupid, but never intended to imply a medical condition.
Right, but it is all context. It could very well imply a medical condition BECAUSE she is getting her medication prescription filled at the pharmacy.
Is that the same place where they couldn't read simple, plainly printed ballots in 2000...?
I've never understood why ANYONE would want their friend to pick up a prescription for them. I could see family members...
Boy, I feel for you. It’s hard to believe you’re still sane. I work in a law office and honestly, most of our non-business (female) clients are on some kind of psycho-type meds. These people are actually basically, most of them, good people and can’t see how screwed up they are and if they’d just get off the meds they’d have a lot better life. Those drugs aren’t supposed to be taken for decades, only for a few months at most to get them over the hump.
“There may be some kind of lawsuit here, but I don’t see a HIPAA violation.”
_____________________
It is both a HIPAA violation and libel.
“Most people treated for depression are not crazy. They are just self-absorbed. “
___________________________________________________________
Just curious where you did your traing in medicine/psychology and when did you get your degree? Did you ever do any clinicals in a VA?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.