Accuracy checks reveal errors on almost 3 per cent of items
Pharmacy's paymaster makes mistakes on almost 3 per cent of the prescription items it prices for contractors to determine their payments, C+D has discovered.
The errors, which lead to both underpayments and overpayments on accounts, were revealed in the results of monthly accuracy checks carried out by NHS Prescription Services.
Related Articles
Who should be ashamed for poor accuracy?
The paymaster reports its overall accuracy target as 99.8 per cent, as calculated using the net cash variance.
But the results of its analyses, which were uncovered as part of C+D's Fight for Fairness campaign, show that errors leading to payment inaccuracies have occurred on average on 2.7 per cent of the items it has reported checking the pricing of since April 2009.
Last week, industry leaders slammed the paymaster's accuracy checking processes after it admitted that it could not estimate how likely it was to pay individual contractors correctly, because it only checked the accuracy of its overall payment to the sector. The NPA called on the paymaster to "get its act together", while others branded the admission "shameful" and "astonishing".
Numark managing director John D'Arcy said of the NHS Prescription Services accuracy checks: "We are told that globally, the total accuracy of pricing is 99.8 per cent. But what is the worst-case margin for error, and as an individual contractor, where do I sit within that margin?
" Mr D'Arcy said it would be "interesting" to see any information that gave a handle on this, and he called for an "urgent review" of the payment system, with the inclusion of a robust mechanism for assuring accuracy.
NPA chief executive Mike Holden agreed. "What we need is a robust, fair and transparent system and for NHS Prescription Services to get its act together, which will enable pharmacists to spend more time with their patients and not waste energy wrestling with checking payments," he said.
Please note You must be a registered user of Chemist+Druggist and logged in to add comments. Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect those of Chemist+Druggist. Comments are considered in the public domain and may be used in future Chemist+Druggist coverage. We accept no responsibility, legal or otherwise, for the accuracy or the content of member comments.
