Requiring a prescription for OTC products is a waste of physician time

Most OTC products, excepting some medical equipment like crutches and diabetic supplies, now cannot be purchased with flexible spending account dollars without a physician prescription.

One of my partners asked last week how I am dealing with this issue.  He has had several patients ask for a long list of prescriptions for OTC products so that they can use their FSP to pay for these things with pre-tax dollars.  This puts us in a no-win situation.  Either we spend the time to write several prescriptions for whatever the patient asks for or spend a similar amount of time explaining why we decline to write the prescriptions.

It is very likely that this is a great example of the law of unintended consequences.  The law was clearly written to increase tax revenue. The unintended consequence is that patients are now asking for a prescription for things like aspirin, Tylenol, body lotion, dandruff shampoo, shoe inserts and nearly anything else you can imagine.  Here are some of the issues I have with this situation:

  • Even in the highest tax brackets the savings for some of these items just are not worth my time to write and document a prescription:  Aspirin cost $2.   Tax savings potential  $0.66
  • This is one more task added to the primary care physicians to do list after patients are seen to accomplish before we can go home.  It takes at least 30 seconds to open a patient’s chart, write a prescription, and get the Rx to a patient’s pharmacy or to leave at the front desk for them to pick up.   Patients often ask for prescriptions for multiple items, some requiring more time than just writing a prescription.
  • These requests use up minutes in a patient visit that can be better used for other care.  Do I want to spend my time gathering enough information to help a patient adjust their insulin and eating to control their blood sugar, or writing prescriptions for their corn pads, aspirin, body lotion and anti-perspirant.
  • Once a physician writes a prescription they incur some liability for the product used.  Let’s say a patient uses a product that they ask me to prescribe.  If they then have a problem in any way related to that product you can bet my name will be added to the list of defendants in the product liability lawsuit.
  • I really don’t know about much about many of the OTC products patients use.  Some of the herbal and supplement products used have labeling that is nearly indecipherable, and certainly nothing I would ever recommend.  Should I now be writing a prescription for these as a money saving service to patients?  I think I’ll say no to these requests.

Really this new law is a good example of a decision made with one intended consequence that leads to another unintended consequence.  In this case the government is responding to concerns about the cost of health care, so they have tried to save costs to the government by eliminating the pre-tax status of some OTC products. By doing so they have increased primary care physician overhead costs.  This is likely a false savings.  It is certainly poor use of primary care physician’s time and is unlikely to be an incentive for new medical school graduates to choose primary care over higher paying specialty care where few of these prescription requests will be seen.

Edward Pullen is a family physician who blogs at DrPullen.com.

Submit a guest post and be heard on social media’s leading physician voice.

email

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2LRZNHDZS6DU45WQ567LPQ7CMI ninguem

    This administration wants to do anything they can to cripple HSA’s. That is their motivation for requiring the prescription, pure and simple.

    • http://www.facebook.com/brianpcurry Brian Curry

      Now, now, ninguem. Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

  • Anonymous

    This is the legislation that the AAFP carried water for non-stop for more than two years. They obviously never considered how any of it would affect their membership.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_2LRZNHDZS6DU45WQ567LPQ7CMI ninguem

      The AAFP **SUPPORTED** requiring prescription for OTC meds?  Do I understand you correctly?

      I didn’t know……..though I’m not surprised.

      • Anonymous

        This requirement is in the ACA. There is much in the law that is good for patients, but also much that is bad for docs. The AAFP let themselves get used big time, once again.

  • http://twitter.com/AustrianSchool_ Austrian School

    It also wastes patients time and third party payor’s $$ since prescriptions are not written without an appointment!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6C65YWGCC7P5C6CGMMBK7VMFXE JenniferL

    Just the death of a thousand cuts by a hyper-regulation crazed Administration.

    And wait until the amorphous ObamaCare nightmare takes more concrete form with (literally) hundreds of thousands of new regulations.

  • http://twitter.com/DoctorPullen Edward Pullen

    Actually most of us do this type of thing without an appointment as it is just crazy to see a patient and waste the time just to write a Rx for tylenol or ibuprofen.  DrP.

    • http://warmsocks.wordpress.com/ WarmSocks

      My family doctor has signs all over his office stating that there will be no refills over the phone and no prescriptions written without an appointment.  It seems like a pretty good way to get people to pay him for the time and charting needed for writing scripts.  When he writes a prescription during an appointment, he includes enough refills to last until the next follow-up. It’s a pretty simple solution.

  • Easton Jackson

    I asked our pharmacist about this law. He hates the law as well, but did see one good argument for it. Apparently, many people would come in toward the end of the year and spend their remaining flex spending on 3 dozen bottles of Ibuprofen, tylenol, ace wraps, whatever. They get it reimbursed through their FSA. 

    Then, they return a few days later and return it all for a cash refund. Now, you’ve got all your FSA money, in cash, pre-tax. When you incentivize a person, don’t be surprised when they do the thing that’s most in their favor. 

    As a doctor, I hate having to write scripts for simple OTC stuff. It’s a waste of time. As another poster noted, it wastes patients time and money as well, since I don’t write these scripts outside of an office visit. Dr. Pullen must be more of a humanitarian than me, because I require a visit. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Craig-Koniver/100001463176810 Craig Koniver

     I completely agree with you that it is a waste of time to schedule an appointment for this type of stuff. I put the burden on my patients here–I tell them they need to fight with the FSA administrators regarding much of the OTC stuff. Since I value OTC supplements and recommend them to nearly all of my patients, I do write out prescriptions for these (when asked). To me there is an inherent problem with this new regulation–I have seen an influx of requests from patients asking for letters justifying the patient expense. The FSA/ HSA administrator wants letters of medical necessity–to me this a blatant intrusion into the privacy of the physician/ patient relationship. So for that reason, I encourage my patients to fight for their rights here and not back down to these intrusive regulations.

  • http://twitter.com/TheNudeMonk TheNudeMonk

    It is very confusing whether to write for these meds or not primarily because the insurance may or may not pay for the OTC meds and furthermore, they may sporadically go on and off formulary for a particular insurance, which makes it even more dizzying.

  • Anonymous

    The article should refer the physician to assign this authority order , via the store manager, to the pharmacist,to the pharmacist-assistant, to thepharmacy technician.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6QL2T67AH3S7DONV7MU23ICIPQ sweetie

    Hi, I can’t see why someone would do that because the pharmacy’s dispensing fee is anywhere from $8 to $13 on top of the cost of product.  As far as most drug plans they will not cover the costs of anything that can be bought O.T.C.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001356842723 Henry Ehrlich

    This is a very sad story.  However, my recollection is that the health savings account law was passed at the behest of one financial institution that was prepared to offer HSAs, although it was draped in high-minded rhetoric about patients making better health care decisions if they were forced to pay out of their pockets, albeit with the benefit of a tax deduction.  My guess is that subsequent restrictions on their use, such as requiring prescriptions, were passed in order to inconvenience patients and discourage use of the funds therein, thereby benefiting the savings institutions.  Is it still true that unspent funds at the end of a tax year cannot be used at all and disappear into the books of the bank? 

  • Anonymous

    Physicians need to charge for their time spent doing these tasks. If a doc feels the best way to do this is by having the pt come in for an appointmnet then that’s what they should do. I would be interested to know if these plans really require a physician to ‘prescribe’ an OTC med or device. My understading was that the patient just needed some type of record or reciept to show they paid for the covered item. I would be concnerned about any legal implications of writning an Rx for pt A if something should go worng , vs notknowing about and/or not writing the same Rx for pt B with the same outcome  or potential risks.

  • Anonymous

    Gaming, cheating ”the system” goes on all the time and then there outright fraud in healthcare. Gotta have regulations, sometimes regulations have unintended consequences – just as this.  Then, some reasonable , regulations are taken away and it makes it worse.  So do what the doc with the signs to make an appt and won’t fill without it – reasonable rule.  If people go through all the trouble to buy a bunch of OTC stuff and then return it, it is small potatoes compared to all the other cheating and fraud that needs to be dealt with.