From Mr J. Wilson, MRPharmS
SIR,-The "peppermint water" case (PJ, March 11, p390) is a salutary lesson for us all, and a reminder that the ancient skills of the apothecary (or chemist and druggist) are not yet quite dead in this age of proprietary medicines and clinical pharmacy. However, the fact that we are rarely asked to make up such preparations is no reason for banning them. We must avoid the classic knee-jerk reaction which so often results from tragedies and problems in these litigious times.
Boots is to be commended on its decision to introduce extemporaneous preparation logbooks. (I myself, as a Boots precollegiate apprentice, filled in such a record while in training - it is now in the Boots museum.) It seems to be an eminently sensible approach and perhaps Boots would publish the layout of its logbook. Alternatively, a pharmacy could use a book similar to a private prescription book, but we would need to have an agreed way of recording the formula of the extemporaneous preparation and the necessary checks, just as we have a standard way of recording a private prescription.
How many extemporaneous preparations are made these days, and what kind of preparations are they? I am not here considering simple dilutions, but those prescriptions which involve weighing, measuring and mixing. Could someone do some research on this? The logbooks would be a useful source of material for the research, and this could then inform any training needs. It is interesting that this case was reported in detail in the same week that we were asked to consider our professional competencies.
Finally, we can only have sympathy for the two unfortunate young people involved. Let us hope that they are dealt with in a compassionate manner by the Statutory Committee.
John Wilson
Arnold, Nottinghamshire