|
Electronic
Commerce Initiatives > Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled
Substances > Working Group Meeting
Technical and Regulatory Working
Group
February 22, 2001
On February 22, 2001, the Drug Enforcement
Administration’s (DEA) Office of Diversion Control (OD) convened the
second Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled Substances (EPCS)
Technical and Regulatory Working Group. This meeting was divided into two
parts – an optional session at which an introduction on Public Key
Infrastructure (PKI) was given, and a follow-up session at
which the status of the EPCS project was discussed.
Note: This e-commerce
project is still an on-going process. Any statements regarding the
requirements of all participants are only being proposed at this time,
although it is anticipated that they will be included in DEA’s proposed
regulations. However, as the project continues to progress and additional
information is learned, these proposed requirements are subject to change
as they have been throughout this entire process.
- Introduction to PKI
- Welcoming Statements
- EPCS Project: Objectives and Advantages
- The Trust Framework
- EPCS Requirement Areas
- The Root Certificate Authority (RCA)
- Subordinate Certification Authorities
(SCAs)
- Q: Why have SCAs? Why can't DEA
certify interested registrants?
- Q: How often must the SCA renew its
authority with DEA?
- Q: I am a SCA that conducts the
necessary checks and determines that an applicant is legitimate.
However, after I issued the applicant a digital certificate, DEA
determines that the applicant is not eligible - will DEA notify
me?
- Application Requirements
- Q: Are the digital certificates
platform independent?
- Q: Who is responsible when a
prescription has been cloned and sent to two different pharmacies?
- Application Compliance Auditing
- Q: When you create and send an
electronic prescription, it is a transaction. What about the audit
trail? You need the event.
- Q: If DEA revokes or issues a new
digital certificate, at the machine level, you will have to wipe
out the hard drive. You would authenticate the machine, not the
person.
- Q: What else besides a smart card
would meet these requirements?
- Practitioner Obligations
- Q: Why wouldn't a biometric be
sufficient?
- Q: In a real practice setting,
isn't it reasonable to presume that a practitioner authenticates
once and leaves it open the rest of the day?
- Practitioner Enrollment Process
- Q: The first step in the enrollment
process is still paper based?
- Q: When practitioners apply for
their DEA registration, will they be able to issued a digital
certificate at the same time?
- Practitioner Re-enrollment Process
- Q: If a practitioner has a
relationship with a Certification Authority (CA) and they lose
that relationship, will the CA continue to renew? Will this be a
requirement?
- Q: Is it possible for a
practitioner to have more than one certificate from more than one
SCA
- Pharmacy Obligations
- Q: Will pharmacists be required to
obtain digital certificates to dispense controlled substance
prescriptions?
- Q: Why aren't refills subject to
verification?
- Pharmacy Checks
- Q: Am I only checking the
Certificate Revocation List (CRL)?
- Q: Where does a pharmacy go to get
this?
- Pharmacy Recordkeeping
- Q: Are you saying that a pharmacist
has to electronically sign something for controlled substances
prescriptions? That would add a step for filling.
- Q: Then in the same context, what
about the work flow using a smart card and a PDA? This would break
a work flow and put a burden on the practitioner and pharmacist.
- Q: Storing records in an electronic
format would allow then to be transferred. this could be done for
regulatory purposes. Would it be permissible within the system?
- Q: What type of records are
generated and where will the prescription information be stored?
- Q: Will DEA be keeping patient
identifiable information?
- Miscellaneous Requirements
- Q: Is there any thought to allowing
LTCFS to transmit to hospital pharmacies? This is valid under
State of California law.
- Q: Can an order be phoned into a
LTCF for a controlled substance?
- Q: Why can't I enter into a
contract with a clearinghouse to validate prescriptions?
- Q: If I retained the corresponding
liability of a pharmacy, can I use a clearinghouse?
- EPCS in Operation
- DEA Efforts to Date
- Ongoing DEA Efforts
- Summary
- Miscellaneous Issues Raised During the Meeting
- Q: Will fees be standardized?
- Q: Is this preemptive for state
forms for Schedule II controlled substances?
- Point-of-Contact Information
Back to
Top
INTRODUCTION TO PKI
- Topics covered included the following:
- Comparison between electronic and digital
signatures
- Elements of PKI
- How Public/Private key cryptography works
- Description of the encryption, message digest,
and digital signature processes
- Verifying message integrity
- Key things to remember
- What is a Certification Authority (CA)
and how is it trusted?
- The CA is the trusted third party that issues
EPCS digital certificates to DEA registrants.
- CAs operate in accordance with a published Certificate
Policy (CP), a document that outlines all operating
procedures for the CA and clarifies legal rights and obligations.
Steve Bruck of PEC Solutions, Inc. and Project
Manager of the EPCS Project, recommended that senders [practitioners]
include their public key information in the message being sent, so that
the recipient of the message will not need to search for it. Although
meeting participants raised concerns with regard to this practice, Mr.
Bruck assured them that providing their public key in a message does not
make the document vulnerable to theft or alteration. The public key
information is information that must be available to the general public in
order for a PKI to be fully functional. As a matter of practice, the same
public information should be posted in a public electronic directory,
including the same public information as part of the message is simply an
added convenience. Furthermore, it is computationally infeasible to
determine a person’s private key from his/her public key.
Back to
Top
WELCOMING STATEMENTS
Michael Mapes, Deputy Chief of the Office of
Diversion Control’s Liaison and Policy Section (ODL), welcomed those
present and announced that DEA is working toward publishing a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) within the next few months. Mr. Mapes stated
that DEA would welcome comments and input from industry in advance of the
rulemaking. In fact, some of those present have already submitted
questions, which DEA has tried to address in the NPRM.
Mr. Mapes said that the meeting would cover the
trust framework and all proposed obligations that will apply to
participants in the system (including vendors, practitioners, pharmacies
and pharmacists); an overview of the EPCS Project; and an update of
project focus areas, such as:
- The registrant enrollment process
- Subscriber private key safeguarding
- Signature verification
- Pharmacy record keeping
- CA accreditation
- Software compliance
Back to
Top
EPCS PROJECT: OBJECTIVES AND ADVANTAGES
Currently, DEA regulations do not permit the
electronic transmission of prescriptions for controlled substances. The
primary objective of the EPCS project is to design a system that will
support the secure transmission of these prescriptions, and have the
potential to work with other applications. The second objective is to
develop a system that is flexible and has minimal impact on industry
participants.
The benefits of this system include improved
healthcare efficiency as well as a reduction in medical mistakes,
prescription forgeries and overall costs. The electronic transmission of
controlled substance prescriptions will be an alternative to the
current paper system — it will not be mandatory that any DEA registrant
participate.
Back to
Top
THE TRUST FRAMEWORK
The purpose of the PKI trust framework is to bind a
DEA registrant’s identity to a digital certificate — thereby providing
an assurance to relying parties regarding the identity and credentials of
the sending party. Since there are about one million practitioners
registered with DEA, the PKI architecture must be designed to be effective
for this environment. The proposed system will center around DEA as the Root
Certification Authority (RCA) and include numerous Subordinate
Certification Authorities (SCAs), who will be certified by DEA.
SCAs will be required to operate in accordance with DEA regulations as
well as DEA’s CP, validate the identities of applicants (practitioners),
and issue the EPCS digital certificates accordingly. This is accomplished
in part by the SCAs utilizing information from the DEA’s registration
database.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
is a summary of the major topics discussed as well as possible solutions:
- DEA plans to include information detailing what
controlled substance schedules a practitioner is authorized to
prescribe in the EPCS digital certificate. If included, this
information would be provided by DEA to the SCA.
- DEA also plans to publish the EPCS Certificate
Profile (a summary of the requirements for how digital certificates
will be defined) and is working with the American Standards
Technology Management (ASTM) on this issue.
- The EPCS project applies to anyone who is
authorized to write a prescription no matter what their specialty as
well as those who are agents of an institution.
- Even though a SCA may have a database with
similar information, the SCA must verify with DEA that the
applicant is registered with DEA prior to issuing an EPCS certificate.
- The DEA’s CP will likely include those actions
that result from non-compliance by a SCA.
- As DEA will be telling pharmacists that any
prescription transmitted through this system can be relied upon, it is
imperative that trust in the system is maintained by strict adherence
to the CP.
Back to
Top
EPCS REQUIREMENT AREAS
The proposed PKI framework is centered around the
requirements and responsibilities of each group of participants (i.e.,
RCA, SCAs, applications, practitioners, pharmacies, and miscellaneous
groups such as, clearinghouses and long term care facilities).
Back to
Top
The Root Certificate Authority
(RCA) establishes a single trust framework, maintains PKI oversight
responsibility, approves and certifies SCAs, ensures trust
interoperability between SCAs, and provides a mechanism for recourse
against SCAs who are not in compliance with DEA regulations and its CP. In
addition, the RCA signs the digital certificates of approved SCAs,
establishes a CP which defines the obligations and standards for
participants as well as the Certificate Profile (what information
is included in the digital certificate).
A general question and answer period followed. Below
is a summary of the major topics discussed as well as possible solutions:
- If a state takes action against a practitioner by
modifying what he/she is authorized to prescribe, the state license
information would come to DEA through its field offices as it does
now. DEA will make the necessary changes in the database, and the SCA
will issue a new digital certificate.
- Timely action and time limits for the issuance of
new certificates, notifications, etc., will be required.
- The Certificate Revocation List (CRL)
will likely be updated every four (4) hours. As people tend to forget
their password, lose their smart card, or in some other way lose
access to their private key; DEA wants to ensure that unauthorized
individuals do not have access to a digital certificate for a long
period of time and thus mitigate any damages. The CRL should be
revised, updated and published often enough, so that pharmacists have
a level of trust that a prescription is from a valid registrant.
- The current recommendation is that the CRL be an
electronic list that will be available over the Internet. It is
similar to the booklets that were used by department stores to
identify invalid credit cards. If the credit card was not in the
retail book, the employee could reasonably assume that it was valid
and go ahead with the transaction.
Back to
Top
Subordinate Certification Authorities (SCAs)
will be required to operate in accordance with the EPCS CP, enroll
practitioners after performing the required checks to verify the identity
of an applicant, issue digital certificates, and perform revocations as
required and publish this information on the CRL. In addition, SCAs will
likely undergo an annual audit — performed by an independent third party
— to establish that it is operating within the parameters of the CP and
to receive an "approved status".
A general question and answer period followed. Below
are some of the issues that were raised as well as possible solutions:
Q: Why have SCAs? Why can’t DEA certify
interested registrants?
First, since there is the potential for certifying
over one million practitioner registrants, it was decided that industry
could handle the registration better. To facilitate this, DEA will define
performance standards for SCA operation. Second, the RCA facilitates trust
interoperability among the SCAs. This ensures that practitioners are not
restricted in their choice of destination pharmacies as a result of their
decision to sign on with a particular SCA.
Q: How often must the SCA renew its authority
with DEA?
DEA is currently contemplating that SCA renewal will
be every five years, and compliance audits be conducted annually.
Q: I am a SCA that conducts the necessary checks
and determines that an applicant is legitimate. However, after I issued
the applicant a digital certificate, DEA determines that the applicant is
not eligible – will DEA notify me?
Yes. The proposed system will work as an initial
synchronization, followed by daily updates notifying the SCAs of any new
DEA registrants as well as those DEA registrants who have lost their
registration.
Back to
Top
Application Requirements. DEA’s goal is for
the EPCS trust framework to be as application neutral as possible. DEA
will not mandate the use of any particular Electronic Data Information
(EDI) standard, although there are efforts underway by the
standards organizations to PKI-enable EDI transactions. These applications
will provide a service to practitioners as well as pharmacies, the
functionality of which will be provided by the vendors.
DEA regulations require that controlled substance
prescriptions include the date of issuance; the patient’s name and
address; and drug name, strength, dosage form, quantity prescribed, and
directions for use. Archived data must be readily retrievable, and any
prescription that has been encrypted will have to be decrypted so DEA can
conduct an audit.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
are some of the issues that were raised as well as possible solutions:
Q: Are the digital certificates platform
independent?
Yes. They are platform independent and follow the
X-509.V3 standard.
Q: Who is responsible when a prescription has
been cloned and sent to two different pharmacies?
This is the responsibility of the application
provider. The EPCS certificate provides a framework to ensure the identity
of the practitioner as well as the validity and integrity of the document.
Application providers need to develop applications that will securely
deliver a prescription and reduce the risk of cloning through various
methods. For instance, if the intended recipient of a prescription was
included as part of the signed and hashed document the potential risk of
cloning would be greatly reduced. In addition, prescriptions can be
transmitted in a protected channel to protect patient privacy and to
eliminate the risk of interception by a third party.
Back to
Top
Application Compliance Auditing. DEA will
likely require an initial compliance audit for all EPCS-enabled
applications to ensure that they initially work as designed in terms of
the PKI module and comply with DEA performance standards. If there are any
major revisions to the application’s PKI-related modules, DEA will also
likely require a follow-up audit to ensure that the revised application
still meets DEA performance standards.
On the pharmacy side, DEA is proposing that the
application ensure that the following requirements are met: the digital
signature must be validated, the content of the prescription must be
verified to ensure that it has not been altered, and the required checks
must be completed to ensure that the digital certificate has not been
revoked or has not expired. It is ultimately the pharmacy’s
responsibility to ensure that the software is in compliance, and the
pharmacies should verify that the vendor’s application meets DEA
regulations. It is anticipated that vendors will make the audit results
available.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
is a summary of the major topics discussed as well as possible solutions:
- Nonrepudiation is when someone is unable to
convincingly deny that they authored a prescription. It is linked to
the performance standards governing private key safeguarding.
- The term "vendors" refers to those
companies that provide prescription software, or that generate and
accept electronic prescriptions.
- The software application for filling
prescriptions will likely have to conduct a "certificate status
check" upon receipt of every prescription to verify that the
digital certificate of the prescriber is still valid.
Q: When you create and send an electronic
prescription, it is a transaction. What about the audit trail? You need
the event.
DEA is proposing that these applications maintain an
audit trail of all signed transactions to include certificate validity
checks. DEA is also contemplating alternate methods for digital
certificate checks, to include the On-line Certificate Status Protocol
(OCSP), which gives a more complete audit trail. The lesson learned
from the GSA ACES program is that GSA had to redo their Certificate
Profile to support the OCSP.
Q: If DEA revokes or issues a new digital
certificate, at the machine level, you will have to wipe out the hard
drive. You would authenticate the machine, not the person.
Once the certificate is revoked, the corresponding
private key is essentially useless. If a private key is stored on a hard
drive, you can recover a private key without wiping out the contents of
the entire hard drive. However, storing a certificate on a hardware token,
independent of the hard drive, is the preferred method as it provides
greater security. For this and other reasons, DEA is considering using a
smart card as the storage device for the private key.
Today’s smart cards generate both the public and
private keys on the smart card. The digital signature is generated on the
card, so the card is both portable and secure. However, DEA is also
considering that a form of biometric authentication be required to
activate the private key stored on the smart card.
Q: What else besides a smart card would meet
these requirements?
Hand-held devises are one possibility (i.e., a
virtual prescription pad). Also a smart card adapter/ sled may be
available; in addition, Universal Serial Bus (USB) tokens are another
available technology.
Back to
Top
Practitioner Obligations. DEA is currently
proposing that practitioners who wish to transmit controlled substance
prescriptions electronically must (1) be registered with DEA to handle
controlled substances, (2) apply with a Subordinate Certification
Authority (SCA) for a digital certificate – which is valid for one year
and must be renewed annually, (3) safeguard the private key, and (4)
notify the SCA in the event that the private key is lost or stolen. In
addition, since the assurance level will be sufficient for controlled
substance prescriptions, practitioners may also use the digital
certificate for the electronic transmission of prescriptions for
non-controlled substances.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
are some of the questions as well as possible solutions proposed by DEA:
Q: Why wouldn’t a biometric be sufficient?
The biometric would be used to "unlock"
the private key while the token would be used to store the key — so
biometrics are really a password replacement and do not act as a physical
storage device. The requirement for a physical device stems from the
requirement to know the status of the private key and whether it has been
lost, stolen, or otherwise outside of the control of the practitioner. As
mentioned previously, DEA is considering the use of biometric devices to
unlock the private key on the smart card as well as use of a pin/password
device.
Q: In a real practice setting, isn’t it
reasonable to presume that a practitioner authenticates once and leaves it
open the rest of the day?
DEA has considered this and is contemplating the use
of a "time out feature". After activating the token it will
revert to its locked status after a set amount of time (possibly 5 to 10
minutes). This function would be similar to a screen saver on your
computer.
Back to
Top
Practitioner Enrollment Process. DEA proposes
that an applicant provide the necessary credentials; complete, sign and
have the application notarized; read the obligations that apply to
practitioners that are defined in the Certificate Policy (CP); and return
the application to the SCA. The SCA would then perform the necessary
identity checks, and make the determination as to whether a digital
certificate should be issued. If the application is approved, the SCA will
send a one-time access code to the applicant, who would use it to access
the SCA to generate a public and private key. The public key will be sent
to the SCA, who will then return an EPCS digital certificate to the
applicant.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
are some of the questions and possible solutions proposed by DEA:
Q: The first step in the enrollment process is
still paper based?
Yes. DEA is currently contemplating that the initial
application for the digital certificate must be physically signed by the
practitioner.
Q: When practitioners apply for their DEA
registration, will they be able to be issued a digital certificate at the
same time?
Initially this may not be possible, but it is a long
term goal. In the beginning, the issuance of a digital certificate from a
SCA will be a separate act from obtaining a DEA registration.
Back to
Top
Practitioner Re-enrollment Process. DEA’s
registration that allows practitioners to handle controlled substances is
valid for three years, whereas DEA is proposing that the EPCS digital
certificate be valid for only one year. Re-enrollment for an EPCS digital
certificate during years two and three of a practitioner’s DEA
registration will likely be done electronically, take place prior to the
expiration of your digital certificate, and be based on the original
application. To ensure that practitioners’ digital certificates do not
expire, DEA will likely require SCAs to remind practitioners to renew
their digital certificates.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
is a summary of the major topics discussed as well as possible solutions:
- DEA prefers to have the digital certificates
renewed annually due to security reasons. As a practitioner is
responsible for safeguarding his/her private key, combining that with
a long digital certificate lifetime makes it more vulnerable to
someone for illicit purposes. Also, annual renewal is the standard
used in other areas of industry.
- If practitioners lose their digital certificates,
they will still be able to write or transmit prescriptions just as
they do now. The electronic transmission of a prescription is only one
alternative.
Q: If a practitioner has a relationship with a
Certification Authority (CA) and they lose that relationship, will the CA
continue to renew? Will this be a requirement?
DEA is proposing that some sort of contractual
relationship should exist between the practitioner and the CA in order to
maintain accountability. Therefore, if the relationship is lost between
the CA and the practitioner renewal may not be an option. In this case a
practitioner could establish a relationship with a different CA and have a
new digital certificate issued. Practitioners may be affiliated with large
health care organizations that have their own certificate authority.
However, DEA requirements regarding CAs and the issuance of digital
certificates still must be met. The healthcare organization must make
decisions based on DEA requirements.
Q: Is it possible for a practitioner to have more
than one certificate from more than one SCA?
Yes. Having more than one digital certificate does
not change anything as long as each is valid. For reasons of simplicity it
is preferable for a practitioner to hold only one valid certificate,
although multiple valid certificates could be issued.
Back to
Top
Pharmacy Obligations. DEA is contemplating
that pharmacies and pharmacists will not be required to obtain EPCS
certificates as they will be "relying parties". However, DEA
will require a digital certificate for electronic order forms (DEA
Form-222). In addition, prescription refills for Schedule III – V
controlled substances will be based on the validity of the original
prescription – re-verification at the time of refill will be
unnecessary.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
are some of the questions as well as possible solutions proposed by DEA:
Q: Will pharmacists be required to obtain digital
certificates to dispense controlled substance prescriptions?
DEA will not require pharmacists to utilize a
digital certificate to dispense controlled substance prescriptions.
Q: Why aren’t refills subject to verification?
DEA policy remains unchanged. If the prescription
was valid when it was written and contained refills, and the patient wants
refills, the prescription continues to be valid for those refills.
Q: One of the advantages of electronic
prescribing is to electronically ask for refills. Can a pharmacist do
this?
Only under the following conditions: The original
prescription (1) was for a Schedule III – V controlled substance, (2)
permitted refills and that the number of refills to date does not exceed
the number on the prescription or the maximum of five, and (3) is within
six months of the date of issuance. Then a practitioner may authorize
prescriptions to be refilled without having to be digitally signed.
However, if the original prescription did not permit
refills; or the number of refills, or the maximum of five refills have
already been filled; or the original prescription was issued more than six
months ago, then the practitioner has to issue a new electronic
prescription that must be digitally signed.
Q: What about electronic renewal requests for
prescriptions by the pharmacy?
The pharmacist needs to communicate to the
practitioner, but DEA is not requiring that this correspondence be
electronic or digitally signed. The practitioner is ultimately responsible
for the prescription. Furthermore, DEA is not eliminating the allowances
for written, oral and faxed prescriptions. You would process those
prescriptions the same way you do now.
Q: What about the transfer of prescriptions from
one pharmacist to another?
Some states allow pharmacists to transmit
prescriptions to other pharmacists. DEA envisions the following. First,
that practitioners send a prescription to one pharmacy, and that it would
be handled as a normal prescription. Second, the practitioner could
retransmit the prescription to a different pharmacy. Third, "Pharmacy
A" could transmit the prescription to "Pharmacy B" as an
oral prescription, which is currently defined in DEA’s regulations.
Back to
Top
Pharmacy Checks. DEA is proposing that
pharmacies check and verify that the practitioner’s digital certificate
and that the SCA’s certificate have not expired or been revoked; that
the integrity of the prescription is intact to ensure it was not altered;
that the practitioner has the authority to prescribe the controlled
substance listed on the prescription; and that the practitioner is an
agent of an institution.
In general, a pharmacist will check the integrity of
a prescription in the following manner. The pharmacist receives an
electronic prescription. The application opens the prescription, computes
its own hash, compares the hash from the original document to the hash
just computed to determine if they are the same (this is an implementation
issue, but the verification must occur). The practitioner’s digital
certificate will be a part of the process. His/her public key, in the form
of a digital certificate signed by the SCA, would be included with the
prescription.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
are some of the questions as well as possible solutions proposed by DEA:
Q: Am I only checking the Certificate Revocation
List (CRL)?
Currently, the CRL is the only list for untrusted/revoked
certificates. If a digital certificate is not on the CRL, then by
definition it is a valid certificate.
Note: The Authority
Revocation List (ARL) will be maintained by the Root
Certification Authority (DEA). The ARL contains those SCAs whose
certification has been revoked or is no longer valid. The likelihood that
a SCA’s certification is revoked is believed to be slight. For this
reason, DEA is proposing to update the ARL every three months. Relying
parties can cache both revocation lists until they expire.
Q: Where does a pharmacy go to get this?
Once the Certificate Profile has been defined, DEA
will likely have a pointer inside the digital certificate that tells the
relaying party’s application where to obtain CRL and ARL information. In
the proposed system, the entire contents are digitally signed by the SCA
and cannot be altered. This is identified in the X-509.V3 standard.
Back to
Top
Pharmacy Recordkeeping. In the proposed
system, upon receipt of an electronic prescription, the pharmacist must
electronically sign it (similar to the current requirement that a
pharmacist mark a paper prescription to indicate that he/she filled it).
This is performed as a separate act and the trust requirements do not
mandate the use of a digital certificate. In this case an access code or
PIN could be an acceptable solution. Electronic records must be
maintained/archived for two years (or longer should the state require it),
be safeguarded against tampering, and be readily retrievable. In addition,
a software audit must be completed to ensure compliance with DEA
requirements (this is, an application audit, not a site audit).
A general question and answer period followed. Below
is a summary of the major topics discussed as well as possible solutions:
- DEA is in the process of finalizing the Federal
Register Notice.
- DEA may allow organizations to conduct their own
software certification audits as long as they comply with DEA
regulations.
- The application to be used must pass the software
application audit prior to the electronic transmission of any
controlled substance prescriptions.
- DEA may build into the system that pharmacies
which purchase application services receive the audit results from the
vendor. If you are the vendor of a particular PKI-enabled software,
then the pharmacy will have to obtain certification of the audit to
show that it has been done.
- The electronic signature binds the pharmacist to
the act of filling a prescription, which is consistent with the E-Sign
law.
- State Boards of Pharmacy have jurisdiction with
regard to who is allowed access to pharmacy records. DEA will need
access to conduct inspection/investigative audits.
- The paper-based system will no longer be a DEA
requirement, but an alternative. DEA is building in an electronic
equivalent of what is currently required in paper form by setting up
security for electronic transmissions and requirements for electronic
records.
Q: Are you saying that a pharmacist has to
electronically sign something for controlled substances prescriptions?
That would add a step for filling.
Currently, when pharmacists receive prescriptions
they must mark the prescription in some manner to bind themselves to the
prescriptions they filled. The electronic signature is a separate act from
the initial logon to the system itself.
The goal is not to add new steps, but to maintain
the electronic process as close to the current paper process as possible.
The conscious act of filling a prescription, then becomes part of the
archived record.
Q: Then in the same context, what about the work
flow using a smart card and a PDA? This would break a work flow and put a
burden on the practitioner and pharmacist.
Prescriptions are not transmitted until they have
been validated. However, the validation may occur in small quantities, or
in one-or-more large batches. DEA will define what must be accomplished,
not when or how in the work flow it must be done.
It comes back to liability. A practitioner has a
Physician’s Assistant (PA) who writes the [prescription] orders, which
the practitioner will electronically sign later. Once signed, the
liability rests with the practitioner. The pharmacist is
attesting/validating that result. At this point, the liability rests with
the pharmacist.
Q: Storing records in an electronic format would
allow them to be transferred. This could be done for regulatory purposes.
Would it be permissible within the system?
Nothing should preclude any other regulation. Any
requirement regarding record availability still applies.
There are two issues. First, the prescription must
come from a practitioner. Second, a pharmacy must comply with many state
requirements, account for controlled substances, and maintain records.
Currently, DEA is proposing that the security requirements for the
electronic transmission of controlled substance prescriptions be held to a
higher standard, then the security requirements for maintaining internal
records.
Q: What type of records are generated and where
will the prescription information be stored?
There is no requirement that a practitioner maintain
records. However, a pharmacy must maintain records for two years (or
longer per state requirements).
Q: Will DEA be keeping patient identifiable
information?
No. This is a trust framework to provide
prescriptions, and as such the only information being collected is
regarding practitioners. DEA will not be given prescriptions in any form,
as there is no mechanism in the system to do this. All DEA will do is
inform a SCA whether a prescriber is a registrant.
Back to
Top
Miscellaneous Requirements. It is not likely
that clearinghouses will be allowed to act as a "trust-proxy". A
pharmacy must validate all prescriptions. Long Term Care Facilities
(LTCFs) that are not currently registered with DEA cannot act as
relying parties. Electronic prescriptions would be between practitioners
and pharmacies.
A general question and answer period followed. Below
are some questions as well as possible solutions being considered by DEA:
Q: Is there any thought to allowing LTCFS to
transmit to hospital pharmacies? This is valid under Sate of California
law.
If a LTCF is a DEA registrant operating as an
institution, then yes. If not, as there is no agency relationship, LTCFs
cannot act as agents of practitioners. This issue is still under
consideration.
Q: Can an order be phoned into a LTCF for a
controlled substance?
A prescription for Schedule III – V controlled
substances can be phoned in now. Technically, it must be phoned to the
pharmacy by the prescriber. Nothing will change.
Q: Why can’t I enter into a contract with a
clearinghouse to validate prescriptions?
DEA will not prohibit a contractual agreement
between a pharmacy and a clearinghouse. However, due to the corresponding
liability between the pharmacist and practitioner, the pharmacy will be
ultimately responsible for the validation results of the clearinghouse.
Q: If I retained the corresponding liability of a
pharmacy, can I use a clearinghouse?
Any corresponding liability would ultimately rest
with the pharmacy as well as any action to be taken by law enforcement.
Turning over pharmacy activities to a clearinghouse could open the
pharmacy up to possible action. The practitioner and pharmacist have DEA
obligations. There is no way to validate that the third party
clearinghouses are doing what they say they are.
Back to
Top
EPCS in Operation. PEC Solutions has
thoroughly researched numerous technical and policy issues in order to
design the EPCS trust framework. Issues ranging from the SCA issuing a
digital certificate to a participating practitioner, to that practitioner
transmitting and validating the digitally signed electronic prescription
have been addressed. In addition, an Initial Operating Capability (IOC)
system will be made available in order to facilitate testing by SCAs and
application providers.
Back to
Top
DEA EFFORTS TO DATE
DEA and PEC Solutions have interviewed registrants
and regulators to gather information on security requirements and to
determine what IT infrastructures are currently being used by industry. In
addition, reviews have been conducted of Commercial Off-the Shelf (COTS)
software for its compatibility with industry’s IT infrastructures. DEA
and PEC Solutions are also working on policy requirements (Certificate
Policy) and the Certificate Practice Statement (CPS).
Back to
Top
ONGOING DEA EFFORTS.
DEA is in the process of developing new regulations
as well as revising current regulations to permit the electronic
transmission of controlled substance prescriptions. In addition, DEA is
also in the process of establishing the RCA, and working with the Veterans
Administration (VA) on a pilot project – the next step of which is to
organize and define a schedule of implementation.
DEA wants to have a real world scenario to develop
lessons learned. The pilot program and the promulgation of the Final Rule
will be simultaneous, not sequential. When the Rule is published, it would
be possible to implement it immediately. Although this will be a Final
Rule, it will not prevent DEA from making any subsequent changes (DEA does
not want to put out false standards). We would like to sit down with
industry to talk about any comments received.
Back to
Top
SUMMARY
Although much remains to be accomplished with regard
to the electronic transmission of controlled substance prescriptions, much
progress has been made towards this goal. Continuing efforts are being
made with attention to the impact on not only industry, but regulators, as
well. The ultimate goal remains to provide controlled substances to the
public while preventing diversion.
Back to
Top
MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES RAISED DURING THE MEETING
Q: Will fees be standardized?
DEA is not going to regulate fees for the
transmission of EPCS. That will be determined by each SCA and the services
each may provide. However, DEA will address the security requirements with
regards to the electronic transmission of controlled substance
prescriptions.
Q: Is this preemptive for state forms for
Schedule II controlled substances?
No. However, each state will have to identify and
modify their regulations to allow for electronic prescriptions.
Back to
Top
POINT-OF-CONTACT INFORMATION:
- Technical questions: Steve Bruck/PEC
Solutions, Inc. at (703) 679-4820.
- Policy questions: Vickie Seeger/DEA Drug
Science Specialist at (202) 307-7283.
Back to
Top
Registration
Support
Toll Free Number: 1-800-882-9539
ARCOS
| Career Opportunities | Chemical Program |
Controlled
Substance Schedules | Drugs and
Chemicals of Concern
Electronic Commerce Initiatives | | Federal Register
Notices | Import Export | Links
| Meetings
and Events | NFLIS
Offices &
Directories | On-Line Forms & Applications |
Program
Description | Publications
|
Questions & Answers | Quotas
Reports Required by 21 CFR | Title 21 Regulations & Codified
CSA
Contact Us | Home
| Hot
Items | Site Map | Search | What's New
|