|
The Pharmaceutical
Journal Vol 267 No 7173 676-680 |
|
Naltrexone implants
|
SupervisionAre ETP and SOPs the answer?From Dr J. A. Rees, MRPharmS Helen Darracott (PJ, 20 October, p577) wants to reopen the debate on supervision and starts with "the profession needs to look at what the patient expects from pharmacy". John Wilson in an article (PJ, 13 October, p504) and letter (PJ, 27 October, p595) describes the patient as having a "fast food" mentality. Perhaps the answer to supervision lies in the opportunity presented by the future implementation of electronic transfer of prescriptions (ETP), professional standards and training for dispensary staff by 2005 (PJ, 13 March 1999, p351) and standard operating procedures. These collectively could provide the possibility for "retraining" the "fast food mentality" patient and freeing time for the busy pharmacist. Whichever system of ETP is implemented, it is the patient who requests the transfer. At the time of transfer, the patient could be informed that the prescription will be ready for collection at time "x" on day "y", ie, not within five minutes. The pharmacist would be required to perform the pharmaceutical checks on the prescription and dispensing, at times convenient to him or her, leaving the dispensing to trained staff working under an SOP. The pharmacist would need to be available at the predetermined collection time to provide patient advice or answer patient queries. Such a system would have the advantages of allowing dispensing and checking to be performed without the pressure from the "fast food" mentality patient, allow more planned work schedules for staff and allow the pharmacist to be involved in new services. However, it would require all community pharmacists to commit to a system of collection times. Judith Rees |
|
|
Previous Topic (Medicines storage) |
Home | Journals | News | Notice-board | Search | Jobs Classifieds | Site
Map | Contact us
©The Pharmaceutical Journal