Monthly Archives: January 2015

Reporting Physician Office Controlled Substance or Prescription Abuse

Physician offices often are hit with an internal crime:  employees utilize the office, its forms, the doctors DEA Number, or even the computers to write unauthorized prescriptions. The physician’s office has the obligation to make sure that forms, computers, and other tools utilized to write prescriptions are carefully safeguards.  Attorneys and malpractice carriers can be consulted for the best practices.

Health and Safety Code Section 11368 states that anyone who forges or alters a prescription or who obtains any narcotic drug by a forged, fictitious, or altered prescription may be punished by imprisonment in the county jail or state prison for not less than six months or more than one year. Since prescription forgery is considered a criminal offense, it is recommended that a report be made to the local law enforcement.

The California Medical Board provides some specific advice:

Federal law requires physicians to report theft or loss of controlled substances and official Federal Order Forms (Form 222) to a regional office of the Drug Enforcement Administration. The DEA has offices located in Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco and the office addresses and phone number are available through their website. In addition, the DEA has their reporting forms available online at the following link: http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/21cfr_reports/theft/index.html.

While neither the Medical Board nor state law requires that a report of stolen or illegal use of the physician’s DEA number be made to the Board, it is our recommendation that physicians provide the Medical Board with a written narrative of the circumstances and the actions taken by the physician so we may have this information on file. When the written narrative is received, this valuable information will be input into the Medical Board’s internal database for reference, as it is not unusual to receive complaints from pharmacists or law enforcement officers regarding concerns about physicians’ prescribing practices. If a physician has already reported that he/she has experienced a problem related to the illegal use of his/her DEA number, the Board has already been provided with background information on the problem. The written narrative should be forwarded to the Medical Board of California, Central Complaint Unit, 2005 Evergreen Street, Suite 1200, Sacramento, CA 95815.

Once the information has been processed, the physician will receive correspondence from the Central Complaint Unit containing their assigned “Conl Number,” which should be maintained for their records. A carbon copy of this correspondence will also be forwarded to the California Board of Pharmacy so they may notify pharmacies in the physician’s surrounding area of the incident. The notified pharmacies will then contact the physician to verify any prescriptions they receive on the physician’s prescription pad or using the physician’s DEA number. For additional questions or concerns regarding this issue, please contact the Central Complaint Unit through the Medical Board’s toll-free number, 1-800-633-2322.

In addition to the above, if the physician is aware of the theft or loss of the tamper-resistant prescription forms, the State Department of Justice, Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement must be notified. To report the theft or loss of the new tamper-resistant prescription forms, Form JUS MUST be completed. Please complete all applicable fields on the form and forward the form to: California Department of Justice, Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement, CURES Program, P.O. Box 160447, Sacramento, California, 95816, FAX: (916) 319-9448. If you have additional questions or concerns regarding lost or stolen tamper-resistant prescriptions forms, please contact the CURES Program at (916) 319-9062.

Matt Kinley, Esq. 

YOUR “JOHN HANCOCK” ON A COMPUTER KEYBOARD

When is an “electronic signature” legally appropriate in the medical context?

More than one would think. Electronic signatures are appropriate under HIPAA and other federal and state laws, and they are enforceable under California’s Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Civil Code section 1633.1 et seq, “UETA”). There are some cautions, though. Digital signatures on custodian affidavit/declaration forms, consents to treatment, and generally all document where a patient must sign are permissible and legally enforceable.
Electronic & Digital Signatures.

There is a distinction between an “electronic” and a “digital” signature. Federal law and many state laws allow electronic signatures on some documents. Electronic signatures can be a picture of a signature, an agreed-upon string of characters, a symbol, a signature typed into a signature block in an ¬electronic form, and other personal non-encrypted, agreed-upon identifiers. A digital signature is an encrypted “hash” or tag that is registered to an individual and ¬accompanies transmission of electronic data or forms signed via computer. They are much more reliable than electronic signatures because they allow recipients to validate senders and prevent repudiation at a later date.

California Law: the UETA

California law provides in the UETA: “(a) A record or signature may not be denied legal effect of enforceability solely because it is in electronic form. (b) A contract may not be denied legal effect or enforceability solely because an electronic record was used in its formation (c)If a law requires a record to be in writing, an electronic record satisfies the law. (d) If a law requires a signature, an electronic signature satisfies the law.”

What is an electronic signature? The language of the statute is simple: an electronic signature satisfies the law. Typically, if the person “signing” types his name on an email, formatted screen or word processing document, that will suffice as a signature. The document with the signature should be reliable: sent from the signers email, or delivered by him or her in some way.

CAUTION!

As in all contracts, the surrounding circumstances are important. In a recent California Court of Appeals case, (JBB Investment Partners v. B. Thomas Fair), the court looked at the actions surrounding a parties alleged electronic signature to a contract. The Court determined that while the party had printed his name in an electronic communication, other communications had determined that there had not been “a meeting of the minds,” or a final agreement as to terms.

Even with this this cautionary case, most of the time electronic signatures will be acceptable for medical records.  If the party signing gives indications of some doubt about what is being signed, you might want to get the document signed in your facility.

By Matt Kinley, Esq.