Tele-pharmacy plan earns legislative OK

Can start in South Dakota, despite lawsuit potential

PIERRE - South Dakota pharmacists received final legislative clearance Monday to use pharmacy technicians to fill drug prescriptions at remote locations.

But members of the Legislature's rules-review committee raised questions about the lack of clear standards for “limited access” areas where tele-pharmacy would be allowed.

Several committee members warned that lawsuits could result if more definite criteria aren't developed.

The Legislature passed the law authorizing tele-pharmacy in 2007. The Board of Pharmacy has used the past year to develop rules for the new system.

The concept calls for pharmacists to communicate with pharmacy technicians and patients at the remote sites using audio-visual networks. Technicians would perform the physical act of filling the prescriptions.

Ron Huether, executive secretary for the Board of Pharmacy, said the rules will allow prescription services to communities where a pharmacist isn't present.

As an example, he said the Pamida pharmacy in Winner plans to operate a remote pharmacy at a medical clinic in Mission. The room will have restricted access.

Sen. Jean Hunhoff, R-Yankton, focused on what standards will be used to determine which communities have “limited” access to retail pharmacy services.

“It would be subject I guess to board member discretion,” Huether replied.

Hunhoff also noted that the rules don't specifically require service to be suspended while the audio-visual link isn't available.

Rep. Roger Hunt, R-Brandon, said he shared her concern about the ambiguity in the phrase “limited access.” He said there could be legal challenges about distance and types of drugs. He encouraged the Board of Pharmacy to develop better-defined standards.

Huether responded: “This is something we wrestled with a long time in developing rules.”

He said the board doesn't want tele-pharmacy to be used to compete with existing pharmacies in a community.

Asked by Rep. David Lust, R-Rapid City, what would happen if multiple providers sought to provide tele-pharmacy services in the same community, Huether said his opinion was the board probably would allow it.

Lust said this could become a matter of dispute under the “limited access” standard.

No one testified against the proposed rules. The rules-review committee approved the rule 6-0.

“I would certainly hope this would be taken back with the questions asked,” Sen. Jim Hundstad, D-Bath, said. “This is a really new thing. This is something that isn't really defined in many places.”

Source