| Characteristic . | Number of community pharmacies (N=48)* . |
|---|---|
| Ownership | |
| Local (within state) | |
| Independent—three or fewer locations | 16 |
| Independent—regional/local chain drug store, supermarket, provider-owned, and other | 8 |
| Total | 24 |
| National (multi-state) | |
| Chain drug store | 15 |
| Supermarket | 3 |
| Mass merchant | 6 |
| Total | 24 |
| Estimated average prescriptions per week | |
| 200–750 | 11 |
| 751–1750 | 16 |
| >1750 | 16 |
| Unknown | 5 |
| Pharmacy information system | |
| Home-grown | 19 |
| Commercial vendor† | 29 |
| Number of years prescriptions received electronically | |
| <2 | 32 |
| 2+ | 13 |
| Unknown | 3 |
| Estimated percentage of prescriptions received electronically | |
| ≤5% | 15 |
| 6%–14% | 11 |
| 15%–24% | 8 |
| 25%+ | 11 |
| Unknown | 3 |
| Characteristic . | Number of community pharmacies (N=48)* . |
|---|---|
| Ownership | |
| Local (within state) | |
| Independent—three or fewer locations | 16 |
| Independent—regional/local chain drug store, supermarket, provider-owned, and other | 8 |
| Total | 24 |
| National (multi-state) | |
| Chain drug store | 15 |
| Supermarket | 3 |
| Mass merchant | 6 |
| Total | 24 |
| Estimated average prescriptions per week | |
| 200–750 | 11 |
| 751–1750 | 16 |
| >1750 | 16 |
| Unknown | 5 |
| Pharmacy information system | |
| Home-grown | 19 |
| Commercial vendor† | 29 |
| Number of years prescriptions received electronically | |
| <2 | 32 |
| 2+ | 13 |
| Unknown | 3 |
| Estimated percentage of prescriptions received electronically | |
| ≤5% | 15 |
| 6%–14% | 11 |
| 15%–24% | 8 |
| 25%+ | 11 |
| Unknown | 3 |
Four pharmacies were interviewed in each of the 12 Community Tracking Study (CTS) sites: Boston; Cleveland; Greenville, South Carolina; Indianapolis; Lansing, Michigan; Little Rock, Arkansas; Miami; northern New Jersey; Orange County, California; Phoenix; Seattle; and Syracuse, New York.
Thirteen different pharmacy information system vendors were represented among the 29 participating pharmacies using commercial systems, including: McKesson (including Enterprise, PharmaServ, and Condor products) (11), QS/1 (4), PDX (3), Transaction Data Systems Rx30 (2), as well as nine other vendors.
| Characteristic . | Number of community pharmacies (N=48)* . |
|---|---|
| Ownership | |
| Local (within state) | |
| Independent—three or fewer locations | 16 |
| Independent—regional/local chain drug store, supermarket, provider-owned, and other | 8 |
| Total | 24 |
| National (multi-state) | |
| Chain drug store | 15 |
| Supermarket | 3 |
| Mass merchant | 6 |
| Total | 24 |
| Estimated average prescriptions per week | |
| 200–750 | 11 |
| 751–1750 | 16 |
| >1750 | 16 |
| Unknown | 5 |
| Pharmacy information system | |
| Home-grown | 19 |
| Commercial vendor† | 29 |
| Number of years prescriptions received electronically | |
| <2 | 32 |
| 2+ | 13 |
| Unknown | 3 |
| Estimated percentage of prescriptions received electronically | |
| ≤5% | 15 |
| 6%–14% | 11 |
| 15%–24% | 8 |
| 25%+ | 11 |
| Unknown | 3 |
| Characteristic . | Number of community pharmacies (N=48)* . |
|---|---|
| Ownership | |
| Local (within state) | |
| Independent—three or fewer locations | 16 |
| Independent—regional/local chain drug store, supermarket, provider-owned, and other | 8 |
| Total | 24 |
| National (multi-state) | |
| Chain drug store | 15 |
| Supermarket | 3 |
| Mass merchant | 6 |
| Total | 24 |
| Estimated average prescriptions per week | |
| 200–750 | 11 |
| 751–1750 | 16 |
| >1750 | 16 |
| Unknown | 5 |
| Pharmacy information system | |
| Home-grown | 19 |
| Commercial vendor† | 29 |
| Number of years prescriptions received electronically | |
| <2 | 32 |
| 2+ | 13 |
| Unknown | 3 |
| Estimated percentage of prescriptions received electronically | |
| ≤5% | 15 |
| 6%–14% | 11 |
| 15%–24% | 8 |
| 25%+ | 11 |
| Unknown | 3 |
Four pharmacies were interviewed in each of the 12 Community Tracking Study (CTS) sites: Boston; Cleveland; Greenville, South Carolina; Indianapolis; Lansing, Michigan; Little Rock, Arkansas; Miami; northern New Jersey; Orange County, California; Phoenix; Seattle; and Syracuse, New York.
Thirteen different pharmacy information system vendors were represented among the 29 participating pharmacies using commercial systems, including: McKesson (including Enterprise, PharmaServ, and Condor products) (11), QS/1 (4), PDX (3), Transaction Data Systems Rx30 (2), as well as nine other vendors.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
