Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T09:30:27.961Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

An Audit: Compliance of Controlled Drug Prescriptions With Legal Requirements and Approved Home Office Wording

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2024

Ivan Saeger*
Affiliation:
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
Callum Sandhu
Affiliation:
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
Michael Kelleher
Affiliation:
South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom
*
*Presenting author.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Aims

The completion of methadone and buprenorphine prescriptions, together: opioid substitution therapy (OST), must conform to legal requirements for the prescription of controlled drugs (CDs) as well as Home Office approved wording when writing instalment prescriptions.

Our service uses a part automated printing system for individual prescriptions and uses a manual record to track prescriptions issued for individual clients over time, a “script record”.

We aimed to audit the terms used on the internal script record as well to audit compliance of OST prescriptions with the legal requirements for CD prescriptions and Home Office Approved wording for instalments.

Methods

All prescriptions for methadone or buprenorphine over the course of a week that were prepared for signing were audited.

The prescriptions were audited against the legal requirements for writing CD prescriptions and against Home Office approved wording for instalment prescriptions.

The script record was audited against internal standards for variation of terms used to describe frequency of collection of instalments.

Results

A total of 64 prescriptions were audited.

100% of prescriptions complied with the legal requirements for the prescription of CDs.

7 prescriptions (11%) omitted Home Office approved wording to instruct what should be done on days when the dispensing pharmacist was closed, i.e. that instalments should be dispensed on the prior open day.

46 prescriptions (72%) had additional Home Office approved wording that was not applicable to the script. For example additional wording to allow for pickup of part of an instalment following a missed day, when the prescription was only for daily supervised consumption to begin with.

Audit of the internal script record found a total of 13 different terms used to describe frequency of collection of instalments; there are 6 standardised terms used within the internal script record. On 2 occasions the frequency of collection of instalments was left blank.

Conclusion

It is essential that prescriptions for controlled drugs follow the legal requirements laid out for them; within the scope of our audit these were entirely adhered to.

There was however more variability in the use of the Home Office approved wording for instalments of OST. Scripts here tended to error for including additional wording not relevant to the specific script. Additionally, the service's own internal script record showed variability in the terms used to describe frequency of collection.

It is evidently important that the wording on prescriptions is clear and concise and the terms used internally are standardised.

Type
5 Audit
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Royal College of Psychiatrists

Footnotes

Abstracts were reviewed by the RCPsych Academic Faculty rather than by the standard BJPsych Open peer review process and should not be quoted as peer-reviewed by BJPsych Open in any subsequent publication.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.