Is a repeat prescription a problem?

What is actually thin about it

Nobody doubts that a repeat is legitimate. The problems are practical.

Age. Repeats are often issued long before the trip, and some regimes expect documentation issued recently. A perfectly valid repeat can still be too old for the purpose.

Brevity. A repeat is written for a pharmacy that already knows you. It typically omits the diagnosis, states the brand rather than the active substance, and uses clinical abbreviations.

No prescriber detail. Registration or licence numbers are frequently missing, and they are one of the most commonly required fields.

Nothing about the journey. A repeat says nothing about your travel dates or about the total quantity for the trip, which is exactly what a quantity check depends on — see quantity limits and trip length.

Automatic renewal. Repeats are sometimes reissued without a consultation. If a route wants documentation from a clinician who has actually assessed you for this purpose, a renewal generated by a system does not satisfy it.

The usual fix

In most cases the answer is not a new prescription but a travel letter from the prescribing doctor, carrying the fields the route requires, alongside the repeat. That is generally easier to obtain, and easier for the doctor to produce if they are handed a complete draft to check and sign — see the doctor's travel letter.

One thing worth doing anyway

Check the dates before you travel. Whether the prescription is still current, and whether the packs you are carrying expire before you return. Both are trivial to fix at home and awkward to fix anywhere else.

What to bring us

The repeat itself, in whatever form you have it, plus the destination and your dates. In the free consult we will tell you whether it carries what your route needs, and what specifically has to be added.