The National Pharmaceutical Association is opposing a Royal Pharmaceutical Society proposal that it should regulate pharmacy technicians.
At its November meeting the NPA board approved a response to an unpublished Society discussion document "A possible role for the Society in the regulation of pharmacy technicians and other qualified dispensary support staff".
Board members believed that the registration of technicians by the Society would bring no benefits to the profession and were unclear as to why it was considered necessary. If part of the intent was to ensure minimum standards of competence among support staff, pharmacists were already obliged by the Code of Ethics to ensure that staff had the necessary skills to perform designated tasks. Technician regulation could be achieved via pharmacist regulation.
Pharmacy support staff operated under pharmacists' supervision in the sale and supply of P and POM medicines - a regulatory mechanism which was already in place. Support staff regulation could be a step towards relaxation of pharmacist supervision. Board members opposed this. They believed that four of five objectives suggested in the paper could be achieved without technician registration. They requested clarification on the fifth objective - the development of pharmaceutical services across a broader front than at present.
Finally, the NPA board was concerned that the Society would eventually and inevitably face a conflict of interest if it became the registration body for both pharmacists and technicians. Registration was the first step towards representation. If technicians were to seek greater personal accountability than pharmacists were prepared to give and turned to the Society for support, what would the Society decide? Would technicians, if they became members of the Society, have a say in policy?
Other matters considered at the November meeting are reported below.
Modern markets The thrust of a Government White Paper "Modern markets: confident consumers", intended to promote good practice in open and competitive markets, was welcomed. Board members hoped that the needs of small businesses would be recognised and that any controls would be proportionate between the needs of consumers and those of business. An additional code of practice for pharmacy was unnecessary, because the ethics code and National Health Service terms of service ensured quality. An "e-hallmark" to ensure that any advice about medicines and treatment provided over the internet was of sufficient quality and accuracy was supported. Pharmacists welcomed opportunities presented by the internet to improve communication, but opposed the sale of medicines via the internet. The NPA would press for a ban on internet marketing and selling of medicines.
Europharm forum Dr Jo Asvall (European director for the World Health Organisation) had told the Europharm Forum that there might be a role for pharmacists in identifying and treating depression. He urged the forum to reinforce its smoking cessation project. He also supported pharmacies as settings for providing lifestyle information and advice. The forum approved a proposal to encourage greater collaboration between pharmacists and health care providers in the field of sexually transmitted diseases, HIV/AIDS prevention and patient care.
Millennium planning A millennium checklist would be sent to members with the December NPA Supplement. An A3 poster would be sent to pharmacies in England and Wales as part of an NHS Executive campaign to encourage people to make the best use of health resources.
Training A study pack "NPA guide to successfully training your staff" would be circulated to members via the NPA Supplement over four months, from February, 2000. It would include sections on how adults learn, training people in pharmacies, helping others to develop and an explanation of training jargon and national vocational qualifications.