Evaluate prescription-entry automation on one defined workflow: where work starts, where it stops, what staff review, and how much effort remains. Use the worksheet below to agree on those boundaries before a pilot, then record the result before expanding.
Define the task and the staff handoff
- Site and system
- Which pharmacy, PMS version and authorized environment will be evaluated?
- One entry task
- Which source and queue are included? What work is excluded?
- Start and stop
- What event starts the task, and what exact state ends it?
- Staff handoff
- Who reviews the result, where do they find it, and who resumes incomplete work?
- Access and support
- Who authorizes access, can pause the pilot and handles support?
- Review decision
- Who decides whether to continue, change the scope or stop, and when?
AHRQ's workflow assessment tools support mapping work before selection, testing with the people who do it, and reassessing after implementation. The pharmacy-specific worksheet here is PillPilot's planning proposal, not an AHRQ-endorsed protocol or acceptance standard.
For example, a pilot can evaluate preparation of an entry record up to a specified staff-review state. Write down whether claim submission, label printing and other downstream actions are included or excluded. These are scope questions, not instructions to change pharmacy settings or bypass required checks.
Use the actual system's workflow names. PioneerRx describes separate Intake and Pre-Check stations, including a review step before third-party adjudication. That vendor description does not establish a particular pharmacy's configuration or PillPilot compatibility with every station.
Compare the whole task, including rework
Choose the measures before the pilot so the team knows what to record. AHRQ's Health IT Evaluation Toolkit starts with stakeholder goals, feasible measures, data sources and evaluation limitations. The observation ledger below adapts that approach to an entry-workflow evaluation; its definitions and thresholds should be agreed with the pharmacy.
| Measure | What to record in baseline and pilot | What to keep separate |
|---|---|---|
| Work included | Observation period, eligible work, source type and exclusions. | All queue work versus the narrower task selected for the pilot. |
| Attempted and accepted work | Attempted items and items accepted by staff at the agreed handoff. | A saved record, a submitted claim and a dispensed prescription are different outcomes. |
| Corrections and exceptions | Items requiring correction, incomplete items and reasons for staff takeover. | A deliberate stop for review versus an unnoticed incorrect result. |
| Staff effort | Active time spent on entry, review, correction and exception handling. | Active work versus elapsed waiting time; routine review versus extra rework. |
| Support effort | Setup, monitoring and support time, with the issue and responsible role. | One-time setup versus recurring effort after the workflow settles. |
| Comparison limits | Changes in prescription mix, staffing, workload, PMS version and observation method. | A selected demo example versus the agreed evaluation sample. |
Keep numerator and denominator together when reporting a rate. “Accepted at handoff” needs its count, the attempted count, the agreed review process and the scope. Define what “accepted” means before recording it; it does not establish clinical accuracy, dispensing authorization or a result outside that scope.
Why a typing-time comparison can miss the result
Illustrative example: an entry step takes two minutes in the baseline. During a pilot, staff spend half a minute initiating work and another minute and a half reviewing or correcting it. The total active effort remains two minutes. Track both steps rather than reporting the shorter initiation step as the saving. These values are invented to explain the measurement, not PillPilot performance.
Make the next decision explicit
Continue
The agreed evidence supports keeping this scope. Record remaining limitations, the owner and the next review.
Change the scope
Name the gap, the change to test and the evidence needed. Keep unresolved issues visible before expanding.
Stop
Document the reason and the staff handoff. Preserve the result so the team can judge a later proposal against it.
AHRQ's historical independent-pharmacy e-prescribing toolset treats implementation as work across preparation, workflow, training, evaluation and ongoing use. Its subject is e-prescribing, not today's AI entry products; use that planning lens without treating it as proof that an automation product works.
Bring the worksheet to a PillPilot demo
Bring your PMS, the source of entry work, the queue that is backing up and the handoff your staff need. Use the demo to identify what can be shown now and what requires validation in your pharmacy. Leave with a task, a reviewer and a next decision. No patient information is needed in the public worksheet.
Sources4 linked sources
- AHRQ: Workflow Tool Examples. Health IT planning and workflow assessment; not an AI pharmacy acceptance standard. Accessed October 13, 2026.
- AHRQ: Health IT Evaluation Toolkit. Evaluation planning and measure selection; no universal savings or accuracy target. Accessed October 13, 2026.
- AHRQ: E-Prescribing Implementation in Independent Pharmacies. Historical implementation toolset; not current AI product qualification. Accessed October 13, 2026.
- PioneerRx: Pharmacy Software. Vendor description of configurable workflow stations; site configuration and integration remain separate. Accessed October 13, 2026.