Critical analysis of the content and enforcement of mandatory consultation and patient profile laws.
OBJECTIVE
This study evaluates the experience of 12 states that mandate that pharmacists provide consult services to patients and maintain drug profiles.


METHODS
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.
Nichol
M B
MB
Department of Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy, School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles 90033.
Michael
L W
LW
D003376:Counseling / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D006801:Humans; D007885:Legislation, Pharmacy; D010353:Patient Education as Topic / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D013219:State Government; D014481:United States