141:(HHS) adopted a rule on the transmission standard for electronic prescriptions in November 2005 (revised in June 2006). The standard focuses on the format of the transmitted information, not the process of creating the prescription or maintaining the record at the pharmacy. The standard specifies fields (name, date, address, etc.) and field lengths for certain transactions including issuing new prescriptions and refills. However, there is no requirement that practitioners or pharmacies use electronic prescriptions. It does require that companies that sponsor Medicare prescription drug coverage establish and maintain an electronic prescription program that meets the standard.
134:
written or oral prescriptions could reduce medical errors that occur because handwriting is illegible or phoned-in prescriptions are misunderstood as a result of similar-sounding medication names. Another consideration is that, if prescription records are linked to other medical records, practitioners can be alerted at the time of prescribing to possible interactions with other drugs the patient is taking or allergies a patient might have. Electronic prescribing systems can also link to insurance formulary lists to inform the practitioner prior to prescribing whether a drug is covered by a patient’s insurance.
176:
The response is then sent electronically to the pharmacy. Staff involvement in generating prescriptions for the prescriber to sign varies by practice. The new method of dispensing allows pharmacists to submit an accurate electronic request for a renewal, decreasing the burden of phone calls on medical office staff. No major changes are expected in the new prescription workflow since the prescriber is the primary actor in the current best practice and is expected to remain so after electronic prescriptions for controlled substances are implemented.
221:
188:
states. While the legality of e-prescribing controlled substances will vary from state-to-state for some time to come, e-prescribing as a whole will likely take a firm hold throughout the country and achieve its potential as a universal, efficient, and safer method of helping patients access their medications.
187:
Some state laws and regulations will require changes before controlled substance e-prescribing becomes fully legal. State boards of pharmacy are offering guidance to licensees regarding DEA e-prescribing software requirements and the legality of controlled substance e-prescribing in their respective
175:
Every provider's workflow is likely to be somewhat different. One potential workflow for renewal requests would proceed as follows. The patient calls the pharmacy to request renewal. The pharmacy sends the electronic renewal request to the prescriber’s office. The prescriber reviews and authorizes.
153:
and therefore not designed to provide safeguards against the diversion of controlled substances. The responsibility for establishing regulatory safeguards against diversion of controlled substances falls upon DEA as the agency charged with administering and enforcing the CSA. Accordingly, while the
133:
was implemented. It contained a requirement pertaining to electronic transmission of prescriptions and prescription-related information for its
Medicare program. One of the considerations in support of this move to electronic prescriptions was the view that using electronic prescriptions in lieu of
34:
In 2010, DEA regulations were modified which lifted previous restrictions against the use of electronic prescribing for controlled substances that have presented a major obstacle to e-prescribing proliferation. As healthcare providers move to implement these new regulations, e-prescribing can be
47:
The rule “Electronic
Prescriptions for Controlled Substances” (75 FR 16236, March 31, 2010) provides practitioners with the option of writing and transmitting prescriptions for controlled substances electronically. The regulations also permit pharmacies to receive, dispense, and archive these
74:
These regulations ensure an adequate supply of controlled substances for legitimate medical, scientific, research, and industrial purposes. The regulations also deter the diversion of controlled substances to illegal purposes. The CSA mandates that DEA establish a closed system of control for
171:
data or (3) physical object such as cryptographic key or hard token. Specific security measures must also be implemented. These include the requirement that two people need to authorize each controlled-drug e-prescription. One person confirms that the practitioner is authorized to sign the
183:
and four partner organizations issued an updated version of "A Clinician's Guide to
Electronic Prescribing." The organizations said the guide reflects changes in the health care environment including the DEA's rule allowing electronic prescribing of controlled substances.
93:, while being mindful that the records had to be usable in legal actions. On April 1, 2005, after extensive consultation with the regulated community, DEA published a final rule that allowed the electronic creation, signature, transmission, and
75:
manufacturing, distributing, and dispensing controlled substances. Part of CSA mandate included that some records must be created and kept on forms that DEA provides and that many controlled substance prescriptions must be manually signed.
167:, utilizing two of the following potential identification factors: (1) password or response to a question whose answer is known only to the practitioner (2) unique physical information, such as fingerprint or iris scan, otherwise known as
118:
was signed into law on June 30, 2000. It establishes the basic rules for using electronic signatures and records in commerce, and it electronic commerce by giving legal effect to electronic signatures and records and protecting consumers.
162:
Before issuing electronic prescriptions for controlled substances, practitioners must meet several key requirements. One, they must use a software application that conforms to regulatory standards. They must also be credentialed for
31:. These regulations would also permit pharmacies to receive, dispense, and archive these electronic prescriptions. These proposed regulations would be an addition to, not a replacement of, the existing rule.
225:
364:
129:
264:
Provides a definition for this article regarding the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) Interim Final Rule for the "Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled Substances”.
63:
149:
The rule has been written to be consistent with the above delineated HHS standard. However, the context in which the HHS standard was issued was not specific to
112:. The DEA had to mindful that regulations on electronic prescriptions must be consistent with other statutory mandates and Federal regulations. Looking back,
328:
138:
323:
361:
172:
prescription. The second person is the practitioner who confirms his identity using the two-factor authentication system described above.
372:
102:
277:
241:
98:
89:(DEA) began to examine how to revise its regulations to allow the use of electronic systems within the limits imposed by the existing
35:
expected to reduce paperwork for pharmacies and practitioners, reduce prescription forgery and help integrate prescription records in
410:
391:
415:
154:
DEA's rule is designed to work in tandem with the HHS standard, its scope is necessarily distinct from the HHS standard.
23:) was originally a proposal for the DEA to revise its regulations to provide practitioners with the option of writing
420:
85:
71:(CSA) (21 U.S.C. 801–971). At this time, most transactions, and particularly prescriptions were done on paper.
105:
controlled substances, orders that prior to that time had to be created on preprinted forms that DEA issued.
284:,” U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of Diversion Control, March 31, 2010.
180:
36:
164:
108:
At the same time, DEA began to examine how to revise its rules to allow electronic prescriptions for
68:
229:
24:
347:
28:
274:
249:
388:
342:
150:
109:
8:
362:
Implementation of DEA CS e-prescribing Rule
Prompts Boards to Offer Licensees Guidance
395:
368:
281:
275:
Electronic
Prescriptions for Controlled Substances: General Questions and Answers
404:
306:
293:
114:
248:. U.S.Drug Enforcement Administration. March 31, 2010. Archived from
168:
48:
electronic prescriptions. The rule became effective on June 1, 2010.
83:
In 1999, in response to requests from the regulated community, the
389:
DEA regulations on
Electronic Prescribing of Controlled Substances
90:
324:
Topical Review: Electronic
Prescribing of Controlled Substances
130:
Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act
64:
Comprehensive Drug Abuse
Prevention and Control Act of 1970
139:
Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services
307:
E-prescribing for Controlled Substances: Will It Work?
157:
329:
Healthcare Information and Management Systems Society
17:Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled Substances
402:
343:AMA releases new edition of e-prescribing guide
122:
373:National Association of Boards of Pharmacy
215:
213:
211:
209:
207:
205:
203:
201:
78:
403:
198:
234:
230:U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration
158:Impact on physicians and pharmacies
144:
13:
61:In 1970, the DEA implemented the
14:
432:
411:Drug policy of the United States
224: This article incorporates
219:
416:Drug Enforcement Administration
242:"General Questions and Answers"
86:Drug Enforcement Administration
354:
335:
316:
299:
287:
267:
56:
1:
191:
42:
181:American Medical Association
7:
382:
246:Office of Diversion Control
10:
437:
375:Newsletter, December 2010.
51:
37:electronic medical records
165:two-factor authentication
69:Controlled Substances Act
123:Electronic prescriptions
25:electronic prescriptions
294:E-prescription Software
421:Electronic prescribing
226:public domain material
348:American Medical News
341:Pamela Lewis Dolan, “
151:controlled substances
110:controlled substances
79:DEA examines revision
29:controlled substances
95:retention of records
67:, also known as the
394:2011-10-17 at the
367:2011-10-14 at the
311:Medscape Neurology
280:2011-10-01 at the
179:In April 2011 the
313:, March 14, 2011.
428:
376:
358:
352:
339:
333:
332:, June 20, 2011.
320:
314:
303:
297:
291:
285:
271:
265:
263:
261:
260:
254:
238:
232:
223:
222:
217:
145:A distinct scope
436:
435:
431:
430:
429:
427:
426:
425:
401:
400:
396:Wayback Machine
385:
380:
379:
369:Wayback Machine
359:
355:
340:
336:
321:
317:
305:Aaron Gilson, “
304:
300:
292:
288:
282:Wayback Machine
272:
268:
258:
256:
252:
240:
239:
235:
220:
218:
199:
194:
160:
147:
125:
81:
59:
54:
45:
12:
11:
5:
434:
424:
423:
418:
413:
399:
398:
384:
381:
378:
377:
353:
351:, May 5, 2011.
334:
315:
298:
296:, 20 June 2023
286:
266:
233:
196:
195:
193:
190:
159:
156:
146:
143:
124:
121:
97:of orders for
80:
77:
58:
55:
53:
50:
44:
41:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
433:
422:
419:
417:
414:
412:
409:
408:
406:
397:
393:
390:
387:
386:
374:
370:
366:
363:
357:
350:
349:
344:
338:
331:
330:
325:
319:
312:
308:
302:
295:
290:
283:
279:
276:
270:
255:on 2011-10-01
251:
247:
243:
237:
231:
228:from the
227:
216:
214:
212:
210:
208:
206:
204:
202:
197:
189:
185:
182:
177:
173:
170:
166:
155:
152:
142:
140:
135:
132:
131:
127:In 2003, the
120:
117:
116:
111:
106:
104:
100:
96:
92:
88:
87:
76:
72:
70:
66:
65:
49:
40:
38:
32:
30:
26:
22:
18:
356:
346:
337:
327:
318:
310:
301:
289:
269:
257:. Retrieved
250:the original
245:
236:
186:
178:
174:
161:
148:
136:
128:
126:
113:
107:
94:
84:
82:
73:
62:
60:
46:
33:
20:
16:
15:
103:Schedule II
57:The mandate
405:Categories
259:2011-09-03
253:(web page)
192:References
99:Schedule I
43:Background
169:biometric
392:Archived
383:See also
365:Archived
278:Archived
91:statutes
52:History
115:E-Sign
137:The
101:and
27:for
21:EPCS
371:,”
345:,”
326:,”
309:,”
407::
244:.
200:^
39:.
360:“
322:“
273:“
262:.
19:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.