I heard recently from a pain mgmt doc in my area that there's a new
rule that says that, for certain controlled substances (perhaps
category II), the doctor has to evaluate the patient in person
periodically. I think the time was something like every 21-32 days,
but I don't remember the exact time period he said. Anybody heard
about this?
The reason I ask is that I've recently started seeing my patients every
month who are on chronic C-II drugs, and it would be easier if I could
tell them there was a rule to back me up in the practice.
Thanks.
Hawki63@sbcglobal.net - 24 Apr 2005 23:18 GMT
>I heard recently from a pain mgmt doc in my area that there's a new
> rule that says that, for certain controlled substances (perhaps
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Thanks.
it is scarey to think you need to ask on a ng questions like this??
P T - 25 Apr 2005 05:47 GMT
I'm starting to hear whispers that the DEA ruled that it is illegal for
a prescriber to issue a C-II rx dated for a future date or presumably
issued with a "do not fill before x/xx/xxxx" notation. Perhaps this is
the origin of the rumors you hear.
Hawki63@sbcglobal.net - 25 Apr 2005 08:50 GMT
> I'm starting to hear whispers that the DEA ruled that it is illegal for
> a prescriber to issue a C-II rx dated for a future date or presumably
> issued with a "do not fill before x/xx/xxxx" notation. Perhaps this is
> the origin of the rumors you hear.
but it is not a rumor
sched II meds have ALWAYS included "no refills" ie "do not fill before dates
or post dated scripts" are logically refills....
not a rumor
more to follow
Matt Beckwith - 16 Jul 2005 20:32 GMT
> I'm starting to hear whispers that the DEA ruled that it is illegal for
> a prescriber to issue a C-II rx dated for a future date or presumably
> issued with a "do not fill before x/xx/xxxx" notation. Perhaps this is
> the origin of the rumors you hear.
This is definitely true.