Our investigations team have recently dealt with a number of concerns about changes to EPS nominations without patient consent. In this article, we want to highlight why patient consent is important.
The NHS Electronic Prescription Service
The NHS Electronic Prescription Service (EPS) allows patients in England to choose a preferred pharmacy, to which their prescriptions can be sent to electronically, and from where they can then collect their medication.
We’ve received concerns which suggest that pharmacy employees are changing the nominated pharmacy without patient consent, potentially to increase patient numbers and revenue.
Deliberately changing a patient’s NHS EPS nomination without their consent could be a serious matter. It can cause unnecessary delays to patients receiving medication, as well as undermining trust in the profession. It may also amount to a misuse of sensitive patient information in breach of GDPR.
When we receive a concern about the EPS nomination process, we consider several factors before deciding whether to refer the concern to a fitness to practise investigation, or to the NHS to investigate.
Key points for professionals
We expect pharmacy professionals to keep to the guidance issued by the NHS, on:
The nomination process and any standard operating procedure in place at the pharmacy must be consistent with NHS guidance and set out the process for changing nominations.
Changes to nominations
Nominations can be changed in a variety of ways, such as at the GP practice, on the NHS app or other third-party apps, however, it is unlikely to be changed in error within the pharmacy. We will look at all possibilities in the course of any investigation.
Taking action
We consider that:
- patient choice is fundamental to the care they receive, and is based on consent
- patients must give informed explicit consent if they want to change their nominated pharmacy
- patients should not be influenced, persuaded or incentivised to nominate a specific pharmacy
When we receive information indicating these principles have been disregarded, we may treat it as misconduct, for the purposes of fitness to practise.