Can't a computer do their job?

[mgb_phys]

So, what are these inserts printed for?

Lawyers

So the system is safe as long as there is someone to blame and/or sue?

God Bless America

 

[mgb_phys]

You could add some simple technology to reduce the risk of human errors.

My grandmother takes the typical mixture of dozens of pills (well typical of anyone in their 80s with access to healthcare) these are now packed in transparent blister packs with the one 'bubble' per day containing the mix of that days pills.

A camera system that imaged each pack and from size/shape/color determined what each pill was an compared it to the prescription would be easy.
It wouldn't be perfect although makers go to a lot of effort to differentiate common pills for easy recognition there is only a limited number of combinations.
But it could tell if a pill was missing/wrong number packaged.

 

[SticksandStones]

So the system is safe as long as there is someone to blame and/or sue?

I didn't say that. However, someone being accountable has a just a little bit more reason to make sure that the person getting the prescription isn't going to die than does a computer produced by some manufacturer X.

I said it before and I'll say it again: Pharmacists have a job that requires a lot of judgement calls on an individual basis that can not be safely or efficiently replicated by a computer. Pharmacists do more than just count out pills.

A camera system that imaged each pack and from size/shape/color determined what each pill was an compared it to the prescription would be easy.

Except that the same medication from different manufacturers can look very different, and two different medications can look very similar.

But it could tell if a pill was missing/wrong number packaged.

It probably could tell if a pill was missing, but I'm not entirely convinced it would be able to tell if it had 2 of drug X and 0 of drug Y.

Otherwise, that could be a good idea. If nothing else it could assist the pharmacist and an extra layer of redundancy.

 

[BobG]

Computers can malfunction and there will always be someone required to monitor the system. Take airplanes for example. Would you trust technology alone to fly an airplaine without a pilot for you?

Computers malfunction much less frequently than humans make mistakes. Humans would be safer having a computer control the entire flight regardless of how they feel about it, or whether they trust the technology. You just as easily find people that think flying is much more dangerous than driving, for that matter. How people feel doesn't always correspond to reality.

Probably the only way a computer is 'less trustworthy' than a human is when an error does occur. The human will probably only the make the error once in a while, even if he doesn't notice that he's made an error. A computer can reproduce the same error over and over and over, turning a programming error into a disaster.

There's a reason why pharmacists can dispense medications and doctors can't. It adds an extra layer of security. You wouldn't be surprised to know how often patients go see several different doctors, and fail to inform these doctors of the medications they are taking from other doctors. However, they often go to one pharmacist. So, when the pharmacist sees your on blood pressure medication and you have a prescription for viagra, they can say something.

Actually, doctors can't dispense drugs because it's considered a conflict of interest to both prescribe the drug and profit from the sale of it. A pharmacist can't dispense drugs from a doctor's office, either. The prescription and the sale have to be kept separate.

The closest the two operations ever get to each other is in a hospital (or in some non-profit medical centers, such as military medical facilities). The pharmacy and the medical side of the hospital still have to be completely separate entities, with the pharmacy simply leasing space in the hospital.

On a side note, a few states also prohibit a doctor's office from administering medical tests, such as lab work, MRI's, etc. Statistically, the number of medical tests requested (and charged for) by a medical office skyrocket as soon as they buy a sophisticated machine, such as an MRI. Doctor's should be focused on treating their patient; not on generating profits through the sale of drugs and medical tests. (Admittedly, a counter-argument could be made that access to the tests for patients that actually need them would be decreased if the general public didn't chip in for the equipment via unnecessary tests).

 

[mgb_phys]

Except that the same medication from different manufacturers can look very different, and two different medications can look very similar.

The same drug looking different isn't a problem (assuming your computer has an OR operator)
Manufacturers make similair drugs look very different - there are a whole bunch of rules/regs on how different the name and look must be.
Most (non-hospital) pharmacists dispense a relatively limited set of drugs. Yes there might be an anti-radiation drug that looks the same as prozac but your local pharmacy is unlikely to carry it.

A system that a-priori knows ,from the prescription, that monday's pouch should contain 3 red square ones, 2 white round ones and 4 pink lozenges is very easy to do.

 

[SticksandStones]

On a side note, a few states also prohibit a doctor's office from administering medical tests, such as lab work, MRI's, etc. Statistically, the number of medical tests requested (and charged for) by a medical office skyrocket as soon as they buy a sophisticated machine, such as an MRI. Doctor's should be focused on treating their patient; not on generating profits through the sale of drugs and medical tests. (Admittedly, a counter-argument could be made that access to the tests for patients that actually need them would be decreased if the general public didn't chip in for the equipment via unnecessary tests).

The argument I hear from doctors is that NOT doing the test and finding out later that the test would have saved the patient's life is a million dollar lawsuit waiting to happen.

Actually, doctors can't dispense drugs because it's considered a conflict of interest to both prescribe the drug and profit from the sale of it. A pharmacist can't dispense drugs from a doctor's office, either. The prescription and the sale have to be kept separate.

Good to know, thanks for correcting me!

 

[BobG]

The argument I hear from doctors is that NOT doing the test and finding out later that the test would have saved the patient's life is a million dollar lawsuit waiting to happen.

They're doctors. Their lobby groups are much more honest than lawyers' lobby groups!

 

[mikapple]

You could add some simple technology to reduce the risk of human errors.

My grandmother takes the typical mixture of dozens of pills (well typical of anyone in their 80s with access to healthcare) these are now packed in transparent blister packs with the one 'bubble' per day containing the mix of that days pills.

A camera system that imaged each pack and from size/shape/color determined what each pill was an compared it to the prescription would be easy.

I like that blister packs idea, I was doing that when I was in the hospital, less miscount. But I guess when you are an out patient, and as someone said, one person may visit a few doctors and they might visit them one on Tuesday, one on Friday, that's kind of confusing for these elderly, my grandpa constantly stares at his medication and doesn't know what to take... I saw a lot of pharmacists were trying to help, but the elderly can't even remember when s/he saw who... I wonder if doctors can live peacefully with a centralized system. (the USB with all their medical information, as an option thing for these seniors.)

And the camera idea is actually being used even at the small pharmacy I worked at. But it's not the real size picture, just a picture to show the markings which is hardly to be seen on a small pill...

 

[Negatron]

The same drug looking different isn't a problem (assuming your computer has an OR operator)

Or a few NAND or NOR operators :)

A computer could certainly do their job and do it much better. The problem is they can't do it yet, even though there is that possibility.