Recurring concern
Unreliable review and monitoring of repeat prescriptions
Pin
Get email alerts
Request correctionFirst reported 26 Mar 2014•Latest report 2 Feb 2026
What this concern includes
Includes failures in the repeat-prescription review and monitoring process, including detailed scrutiny before approval, review against applicable guidance, regular monitoring of ongoing repeat medication, consideration of relevant patient circumstances and follow-up of continued prescribing.
Not included
- Excludes medication-quantity controls where the specific concern is excessive supply or transaction limits without a repeat-prescription review or monitoring failure.
- Excludes prescribing, dispensing, administration or supply failures unrelated to repeat prescriptions or their review and monitoring.
- Excludes long-term medication reviews where repeat prescribing is not the supported process boundary.
- Excludes failures to obtain patient wishes before a pharmacist requests a repeat prescription unless the assertion also identifies deficient clinical review or monitoring of the repeat prescription.
- Excludes generic electronic-record, staffing, documentation or communication deficiencies unless they directly impair repeat-prescription review or monitoring.
- Reports
- 14
- Individual concerns
- 18
- Date range
- 2014–2026
- Stated actions
- 36
Distinct published reports
A report can raise multiple concerns
First to latest report issue date
Described in published responses
Reports over time
Reports over time
Reports about this concern issued each year.
* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.
Most frequent recipients
Most frequent recipients
Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.
Concerns and responses across reports
Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to properly and regularly monitor repeat-prescription medication
This report raised 10 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.1
-
Action
Review SystmOne use with partner agencies and develop a multi-agency protocol for risk communication and medicines optimisation.
Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Ongoing monitoring of repeat antidepressant medication is the responsibility of the prescribing GP or CNWL prescriber, rather than solely CNWL mental health services.
Stated by Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to ensure appropriate medical reviews of patients on citalopram before repeat prescriptions are issued
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.2
-
Action
Implement a repeat-prescribing protocol requiring antidepressant reviews at least every six months before further prescriptions are issued.
Stated by Midlands Medical Partnership -
Action
Configure an electronic clinical-system prompt that prevents depression-coded repeat prescriptions without a documented review in the preceding six months.
Stated by Midlands Medical Partnership
Respondent positions A position is what a respondent says about the concern when they do not describe a specific action.1
-
Position
Existing repeat-prescribing protocols and electronic prompts are considered sufficient to ensure timely antidepressant reviews.
Stated by Midlands Medical Partnership
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to review or discontinue repeat prescriptions when medicines are no longer needed or when required monitoring is missed
This report raised 3 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
No linked response statementsNo respondent-stated action or position is linked to these concerns in the published data.
-
Concerns raised1
Failure to review patients within their own guidelines for repeat prescriptions
This report raised 2 other concerns. They are not shown here because they do not form part of this recurring concern.
Responses linked to these concernsEach statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.
Actions described in response An action is something a respondent says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to the concern raised.4
-
Action
Rewrite the repeat prescribing policy for psychotropic medications and require an additional prescribing-doctor review to confirm dose and reduce harm.
Stated by Riverside Surgery -
Action
Require CMHT correspondence before changing medication, record medication changes, and prompt GPs to reconcile surgery and CMHT medication lists.
Stated by Riverside Surgery -
Action
Limit psychotropic medication issues to one month and require GP re-issue and review against current CMHT correspondence before further supply.
Stated by Riverside Surgery
-
Action
Continue holding specific mental-health reviews and reviewing patients through specialist correspondence, case meetings, and face-to-face consultations.
Stated by Riverside Surgery
Data last updated 7 September 2026