Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Automated Patient Delivery Systems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State board adopts rule to require video for automated-patient dispensing consultations
Summary
The California State Board of Pharmacy voted to adopt regulatory text updating consultation requirements for automated patient delivery/dispensing systems, clarifying that consultations must include two-way audio and video and that pharmacies remain available to provide immediate consultations by phone or in person.
The California State Board of Pharmacy on Tuesday adopted changes to California Code of Regulations, Title 16, section 1713 to align consultation requirements with recent statute and to clarify technology expectations when prescriptions are dispensed through automated patient dispensing or delivery systems.
The rulemaking package clarifies that consultations for prescriptions dispensed through an automated patient delivery/dispensing system must include two-way audio and video, while also stating that pharmacies must remain accessible so patients can receive an immediate consultation by telephone or in person.
Board President Seung Oh told members the changes were intended to "remove possible confusion regarding the technology requirements when providing patient consultation for prescriptions dispensed via an automated patient delivery system, APDS" and to conform the regulation to the statutory standard. Janice Dang, a staff member who works on inspections and compliance, explained to members that ADDS (automated drug dispensing systems) encompasses devices from locker-style patient dispensing units to unit-dose systems used in hospitals and long-term care.
During discussion, licensee member Renee Barker raised wording concerns about a sentence that she called "awkward" and staff clarified that a stray strikethrough in draft text had been cleaned up. KK Jha asked if the requirement meant a telephone consult would suffice; Seung Oh and staff explained the first sentence requires video and audio at the point of dispensing, while the subsequent sentence emphasizes that a pharmacy must be accessible to provide an immediate consultation by phone or in person when needed.
A member of the public, identified in the record as Steven Gray, commented that "the statute does say dispensing system, not delivery system. So the regulation is correct. It is a dispensing system named in the statute." The board closed public comment after one additional technical clarification and moved to the formal vote.
Licensee member Renee Barker made the motion to adopt the proposed regulatory text as noticed on 02/21/2025 and to authorize the executive officer to complete the rulemaking process and make technical, non‑substantive changes as required. The motion was seconded by Satinder Sandhu. The roll call recorded all members present voting yes and the motion passed.
What the board adopted clarifies technology expectations for remote consultations and reinforces that pharmacies retain an obligation to make pharmacists available for immediate consults; it does not change statutorily defined substantive consultation requirements beyond aligning the regulation with existing statutory language.
Board staff said the adopted text will be submitted to control agencies as the board completes the regulatory file and the updated regulation will be posted when the rulemaking is finalized.
