The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 267 No 7156 p51-52
July 14, 2001

  Pharmacist careers
  Pharmacist awards
  Sale of P medicines
  Primary care pharmacy
  Self-checking
  Dispensing labels
  The Journal

Self-checking (2 letters)

Checking work depends on circumstances

From Mr P. J. Taylor, MRPharmS

I consider your questionnaire on self-checking (PJ, 7 July, p11) to be incomplete, because circumstances alter cases.

Self-checking by pharmacists and pharmacy technicians is satisfactory if the pharmacy is not excessively busy and if staff are well trained.

If concentration is undisturbed, self-checking is fine. Mistakes occur when the person dispensing is interrupted or distracted or indeed if overworked. Some dispensaries are badly planned in that the frontage to the shop area is only partial and customers can start a conversation with the pharmacist while dispensing is in progress.

Although I believe that who checks what should be left to the pharmacist, I insist upon checking everything myself and shall continue to do so.

P. J. Taylor
Burntwood,
Staffordshire

Quality of response affected by difficult questionnaire

From Mr K. A. T. Ramsden, MRPharmS

Am I alone in being uncomfortable with “self-checking” as a description of non-pharmacist checking, or is it as literal as it sounds ?

I believe that any form of self-check should be discouraged. If we mean checking of one technician’s work by another, then why not call it “technician checking”?

I would guess that a number of my colleagues would find the survey (PJ, 7 July, p11) difficult to complete because of this phrase and this could influence the quality of the responses received.

Kurt Ramsden
Guisborough,
Cleveland

Back to Top

Previous Topic (Primary care pharmacy)
Next Topic (Dispensing labels)
Send your letter to The Editor