Handling patient record correction requests in pharmacy

Patient record correction requests ask a pharmacy to assess information it holds and take reasonable steps to correct it when required.

A patient may report an incorrect address, question an entry or say that a current medication list no longer reflects their circumstances. Those requests need different assessments.

This guide concerns correction under Australian Privacy Principle (APP) 13. A request to obtain a copy of information follows the separate health-record access process.

Key facts

• OAIC guidance requires assessing correction requests against the information’s purpose, including accuracy, currency, completeness and relevance.
• Distinguish inaccurate current information from accurate history, and refer clinical questions to the responsible pharmacist.
• Explain the decision, handle any requested disagreement statement and track required follow-up. An acknowledgement alone does not complete the response.

How should you accept a correction request?

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner’s (OAIC) correction-request guidance says an organisation may offer a preferred process, but cannot require a particular form.

Listen for the substance of the request. A person saying “that entry about me is wrong” should not need to know the term APP 13.

Record the disputed information, the correction sought and how the person can be contacted. Clarify uncertainty without asking them to repeat the entire account to several staff members.

Check identity or representative authority proportionately. The OAIC suggests sighting identity documents in preference to retaining copies when that is sufficient.

Appoint a responsible owner and a backup. Keep the request in an approved, access-controlled system rather than an informal note that can disappear at shift change.

What is the record meant to show?

APP 13 addresses accuracy, currency, completeness, relevance and whether information is misleading, having regard to the purpose for which it is held.

This purpose matters. A medicine recorded as current can need correction when circumstances change, while an accurate historical entry may remain relevant.

The OAIC’s health-information guidance uses this distinction to explain why updating current information does not automatically mean erasing medical history.

Where a request may affect clinical assessment or medicine supply, refer it promptly to the responsible pharmacist. Administrative staff should not make clinical conclusions simply to clear the request.

A correction process also needs to recognise disputed opinions. Disagreement alone does not establish that a properly recorded, informed professional opinion is inaccurate. Present an opinion as an opinion and assess its currency, completeness, relevance and potential to mislead.

Ask for further information where needed and explain what would help the assessment. Keep the difference between a factual error and a disputed judgement visible.

Which records need review?

Identify the records the pharmacy possesses or controls that are relevant to the request. The OAIC procedure covers both paper and electronic information.

Do not assume that correcting the most visible screen changes every copy. Consider related records, authorised exports and paper documents where they fall within the request.

Limit the search and working material to what is needed. Do not create a whole-database export for a single correction request.

The following is a local review aid, not a mandatory national form:

Request type	Review question	Possible next step
Incorrect contact detail	Which current records use the detail?	Verify and amend the relevant information
An outdated current list	Is it being presented as current or historical?	Obtain qualified review and update the appropriate view
Disputed professional opinion	Was the opinion accurately recorded and properly informed?	Assess the request and explain the decision
Information already disclosed	Was the information now being corrected previously disclosed to another APP entity?	Explain the option to request downstream notification
Refused correction	Has the required refusal process been followed?	Provide written notice, explain the statement option and take reasonable steps to associate a requested statement

Record the evidence considered and any unresolved questions. Avoid silently merging two people’s records or changing a clinical entry without the appropriate authorised review.

Correct information while preserving necessary history

Use the system’s supported amendment process and the pharmacy’s approved procedures. Record what changed, why and who authorised the change where appropriate.

This is a practical control, not a claim that every software package has the same audit features. Obtain provider guidance when the supported method is unclear.

Consider retention requirements separately. A correction request does not remove every obligation to retain an accurate historical record.

Confirm to the person what was corrected and what the decision covers. The OAIC describes confirmation of a successful correction as good practice.

Explain that they can request notification to another APP entity that previously received the information now corrected. APP 13 requires reasonable steps on such a request, unless notification is unlawful or impracticable.

Do not promise automatic correction across every provider or system. Record the requested notifications, actions taken and any limitation requiring explanation.

A fictional request with two different outcomes

A patient asks to update their current address and remove an old medicine entry. The OAIC health-information guide distinguishes current information from accurate history; the two requests need separate decisions.

After proportionate identity checks, a suggested decision record could show:

1. Current address: The authorised staff member verifies the new detail and corrects the relevant current record using the approved process.
2. Medicine entry: The responsible pharmacist assesses its purpose and accuracy. Does it describe historical supply, or is the system presenting it as current?
3. Response: Explain the completed address correction and the medicine entry’s separate status. If that decision remains pending, name the responsible person and next step.

This fictional example does not decide whether the medicine entry should change. It shows why completing one part must not silently close the other. Follow the refusal process below if a requested correction is declined.

What happens if correction is refused?

If the pharmacy refuses correction, APP 13 requires written notice. This includes reasons, except where it would be unreasonable to provide them, and available complaint mechanisms.

Keep the complaint handling process available when the person remains dissatisfied with the response.

Use an explanation that addresses the actual request. A generic “the system will not allow it” does not resolve whether the information needs correction.

Tell the person they can request a statement of disagreement, for example in the refusal notice.

If the person requests a statement that they consider the information inaccurate, out of date, incomplete, irrelevant or misleading, take reasonable steps to associate it.

The health guidance discusses associating that statement with the affected information and making it apparent to people using the record. A hidden attachment that routine users cannot discover may not achieve the intended purpose.

Keep disagreement handling separate from changing a professional opinion merely because it is contested. Qualified assessment and the person’s ability to record disagreement can both matter.

Track the response and close the loop

An organisation must correct the information or communicate refusal within a reasonable period. An acknowledgement alone does not complete the response. OAIC guidance generally expects no more than 30 calendar days. That expectation differs from the fixed period for agencies.

Do not wait for that general timeframe if a possible error could affect care. Escalate the immediate concern while the correction request is assessed.

There is no charge for making a correction request, correcting information or associating a statement under APP 13.

Additional health-record requirements may apply, including in New South Wales, Victoria and the ACT. Check the relevant jurisdiction rather than treating this federal outline as exhaustive.

Close the request with the decision, action, communication and any continuing follow-up recorded. The person should know the outcome, and authorised staff should be able to understand the record.