| I. Statutes/regs on health care providers’ authority
to prescribe for STDs to a patient’s partner(s) w/out prior evaluation (Explanation) |
 Physicians prohibited from prescribing to a patient without sufficient
examination or establishing physician/patient relationship. Okla.
Stat. tit. 59 §§ 509(12), 637.
It is unlawful for any person not a physician to treat anyone for
an STD, unless that person is under direct control of a physician. Id.
at § 1-521. |
| II. Specific judicial decisions concerning EPT (or like practices) (Explanation) |
Physician misconduct found when physician prescribed to patients
without establishing physician-patient relationship or prior examination.
State v. Litchfield, 103 P.3d 111 (Okla. Civ. App. 2004). State v. Ray,
848 P.2d 46 (Okla. Civ. App. 1992). |
| III. Specific administrative opinions by the Attorney General
or medical or pharmacy boards concerning EPT (or like practices) (Explanation) |
The Oklahoma State Board of Medical Licensure and Supervision determined
that “Unprofessional conduct includes "prescribing or administering
a drug or treatment without sufficient examination and the establishment
of a valid physician/ patient relationship” pursuant to Title 59
O.S. 509-12. Also, a “sufficient examination” and “establishment
of a valid physician/patient relationship” can NOT take place without
an initial face to face encounter with the patient. In other words, it
requires at a minimum: . . .
2. Establishing a diagnosis through the use of accepted medical practices such
as a patient history, mental status exam, physical examination and appropriate
diagnostic and laboratory testing by the prescribing physician;
3. Discussing with the patient,
the diagnosis and the evidence
for it, the risks and benefits of
various treatment options; and
4. Insuring availability of the physician or coverage for the patient for appropriate
follow-up care.”
[Link to Medical Board Policy Position] |
| IV. Legislative bills or prospective regulations concerning EPT
(or like practices) (Explanation) |
|
| V. Laws that incorporate via reference guidelines as acceptable
practices (including EPT) (Explanation) |
|
| VI. Prescription requirements (Explanation) |
Prescription label must bear name of patient. Okla.
Stat. tit. 59 §§ 353.13A
, 355.1.
If the name of patient is stated in the prescription, the label
must bear the patient’s name. Okla.
Stat. tit. 63, § 1-1409.
“The pharmacy or pharmacist shall not dispense a prescription
drug if the pharmacist knows or should have known that the prescription
was issued solely on the basis of an internet-based questionnaire, an
internet–based consultation, or a telephonic consultation without
a valid preexisting patient-practitioner relationship.”
OAC tit 535 § 15-3-13(d) |
| VII. Assessment of EPT’s legal status with brief comments (Explanation) |
 EPT is likely prohibited.
Statutory authority, case law, medical board opinions, and administrative
regulations require a physician to conduct a physical exam prior to prescribing
any drugs. The physician and the dispensing pharmacist would be subject
to penalties if they knowingly allow a third-party who was not the physician’s
patient to procure a prescription drug.
|
| Status as of August 16, 2006 |
Exception:
EPT is permissible in Baltimore, Maryland.
supports the use of EPT
EPT
is permissible
EPT
is potentially allowable
