Section 9 repeals the definition for person authorized by the patient.
Section 10 updates the definition of PDMP data as the information compiled and analyzed by the system based upon data submitted by dispensers.
Section 11 repeals the portion of the PDMP information definition because it no longer is applicable.
Section 12 creates definitions for PDMP system and personally identifiable information. The PDMP system is the entire hardware and software of the systems. Personally identifiable information is information which identifies a person.
Section 13 updates the definitions of pharmacist, pharmacist delegate, pharmacy, practitioner and practitioner delegate. Pharmacist is updated to recognize pharmacists who are licensed in another state but engage in practice in Wisconsin or at a pharmacy licensed as an out-of-state pharmacy. Pharmacist delegate and practitioner delegate are updated to reflect the change in terminology from PDMP information to monitored prescription drug history reports. The pharmacy definition has an updated statutory reference. Practitioner definition adds people who are licensed in another state but can legally engage in practice in our state without a Wisconsin license.
Section 14 creates a definition of prescribing metrics report which includes PDMP data, audit trails, reports about a patient submitted to the program and information from the analytics platform. It also creates a definition for prosecutorial unit citing the definition in statute.
Section 15 repeals from the drugs that have a substantial potential for abuse, those substances which are identified in schedule IV or V in the Wisconsin controlled substances schedules due to these substances are monitored drugs and no longer need the separate identification.
Section 16 repeals the definitions for “dispenser identifier”, “NPI number” and “practitioner identifier” as they are no longer utilized.
Section 17 removes dispenser identifier and practitioner identifier and replaces with the DEA registration number; removes the name and strength of the monitored prescription drug. It also clarifies the language that the board may refer a dispenser and dispenser delegate for failing to comply the dispensing data to the appropriate licensing board for discipline or to law enforcement for prosecution.
Section 18 updates that dispensing data may be transmitted in multiple ways.
Section 19 creates that dispensing data may be submitted as a file that complies with the data standards identified in the implementation guide. Or by using the prescription record entry functions of the system.
Section 20 recreates the note for how the data standards in version 4 release 2 of the ASAP implementation guide for prescription monitoring programs may be obtained.
Section 21 repeals two portions of electronic submission of dispensing data which are no longer methods of submission.
Section 22 indicates that the board may refer a dispenser or delegate that fail to submit data to the licensing board for discipline or to law enforcement for possible prosecution.
Section 23 requires submission of dispensing data to the PDMP no later than 11:59 p.m. the next business day after the monitored prescription drug is dispensed. If no monitored prescription drug is dispensed during that business day, the dispenser shall submit a zero report. If a report is unable to be submitted due to circumstances beyond the control of the dispenser, the dispenser may request an emergency waiver from the board. The board may refer a dispenser or delegate that fail to submit data to the licensing board for discipline or to law enforcement for possible prosecution.
Section 24 creates provisions for correcting dispensing data within 5 business days of discovering the error. The board may refer a dispenser or delegate that fails to correct data to the licensing board for discipline or to law enforcement for possible prosecution.
Section 25 creates a provision that a dispenser is not required to submit dispensing data when a drug is prepared for delivery but not yet delivered.
Section 26 repeals and recreates the provisions relating to access to monitored prescription drug history reports and PDMP data to reflect updated terminology and requirements as a result of Acts 266, 267 and 268. Monitored prescription drug history reports may be accessed by healthcare professionals, pharmacists and pharmacist delegates if the individual is treating or rendering assistance to the patient or the individual is being consulted regarding the health of the patient. Healthcare professionals, pharmacists and pharmacist delegates may only disclose monitored prescription drug history reports to the patient, to another healthcare professional or medical coordinator for consultation, to the pharmacist or practitioner who is directly treating or rendering assistance or to a law enforcement agency.
Section 27 creates a section regarding monitored prescription drug history reports and audit rails about healthcare professions. Healthcare professionals may access audit trails about themselves and their delegates. A practitioner may access the audit trails accessible to healthcare professionals and a prescribing metrics report about themselves. Medical coordinators may access prescribing metrics reports and audit trails about individuals they direct or supervise or if they are evaluating the job performance or performing quality assessment and improvement activities.
Section 28 provides grounds for denying, suspending, revoking or restricting or limiting access to the PDMP.
Section 29 updates to include healthcare professional and medical coordinator.
Section 30 repeals a no longer valid cross reference.
Section 31 updates the section to include healthcare professional and medical coordinator.
Section 32 creates the provision that the practitioner review PDMP before prescribing unless the patient is receiving hospice care, the prescription is for 3 days or less, the drug is administered to the patient, the practitioner is unable to review the PDMP due to an emergency or because the PDMP is not operation or other technological failure that is reported to the board. The board may refer a practitioner that fails to review the PDMP to the licensing board for discipline or to law enforcement for possible prosecution.
Section 33 updates terminology. It also clarifies if a patient is requesting data by mail that copies of two forms of identity must be included with the request.
Section 34 creates a provision the board may disclose the minimum necessary amount of information to designated staff of a federal or state governmental agency that cites the agency’s authorization to similar confidential patient care records.
Section 35 updates terminology.
Section 36 repeals an obsolete note.
Section 37 updates that the PDMP database is to store dispensing data and is in a secure environment and encrypted format.
Section 38 repeals the separate provision that is unnecessary due to the update in section 37.
Section 39 creates a requirement for the board to develop and maintain PDMP to facilitate the submission of dispensing data, creation of monitored prescription drug history reports about patients, practitioners and dispensers and access to the monitored prescription drug history reports, prescribing metrics reports and audit trails.
Section 40 creates the description of audit trails which includes logs of dispensing data, persons who have access to the PDMP, prescription monitoring programs in other states which shares data, pharmacies and hospitals which are determined to have the equivalent capability to maintain the confidentiality of monitored prescription drug history reports and a log of each time a person accesses PDMP, monitored prescription drug history reports and PDMP data disclosed pursuant to CSB 4.11 and requests for PDMP data or monitored prescription drug history reports even when no information was disclosed.
Section 41 repeals the separate provisions regarding logs which must be maintained due to the creation of section 40.
Section 42 updates terminology.
Section 43 creates provision regarding the operation of the analytics platform.
Section 44 updates terminology from PDMP information to monitored prescription drug history reports, audit trails and PDMP data.
Section 45 creates the requirement for preparing monitored prescription drug history reports, audit trails and PDMP data for the board to review in determining whether suspicious or critically dangerous conduct or practices took place.
Section 46 updates terminology regarding the confidentiality of PDMP records. It clarifies that a person who discloses PDMP data may be referred for discipline or prosecution.
Section 47 updates terminology from information to monitored prescription drug history reports and data.
Section 48 amends the information being reviewed and disclosed by the board when determining suspicious or critically dangerous conduct to include dispensing data, monitored prescription drug history reports, and PDMP data.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation: None
Comparison with rules in adjacent states:
Illinois: Illinois requires reporting to the drug monitoring program within one day. Illinois does not require mandatory use of the drug monitoring program. Illinois does not provide access to mental health, substance abuse professionals or law enforcement.
Iowa: Iowa requires reporting to the drug monitoring program within one week. Iowa does not require mandatory use of the drug monitoring program. Iowa does not provide access to mental health, substance abuse professionals or law enforcement.
