The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 267 No 7179 p872
22-29 December 2001

This article
Reprint
Photocopy

Ending 2001 on a positive note

It is not often that pharmacists figure in the main news bulletins on radio and television. However, earlier this week they did, as a result of the publication of the Audit Commission report "A spoonful of sugar — medicines management in NHS hospitals" (see p873).

And, although the report makes for gloomy reading for the average health service watcher, it is good news for pharmacists, and it is encouraging to end the year on a positive note.

Much of the waste, the risks associated with taking modern medicines and common medication errors — to name a few problems encountered in every NHS hospital — could be alleviated if pharmacists had a more central role in the delivery of health care. As the reports says: "Pharmacy services need to be seen as a core clinical function, not a technical support service."

The Audit Commission argues that pharmacy services should be re-engineered "to put pharmacists closer to patients as this is where they add the greatest value. Trusts should review the tasks that are being undertaken by pharmacists with a view to ensuring that this objective is met, while activities like dispensing are automated. Revision and expansion of the pharmacy technician and pharmacy assistant roles need to play a major part in this strategy, provided that proper competency assessments are established and adhered to."

And then: "The role of the pharmacy technician is now so pivotal to hospital pharmacy services that the [Royal Pharmaceutical Society] should consider the formal registration of pharmacy technicians."

This is just what the Council of the Society has decided to do (p895). At a strategic meeting earlier this month, Council members agreed that this was an important step to take, as part of modernising the Society's regulatory system. Support staff are as integral to the provision of a modern pharmacy service as pharmacists, and not to embrace them at this juncture would be a mistake. There will be pharmacists who fear it will be a greater mistake for the Society to embrace everyone, because it will inevitably lead to conflicts of interest between pharmacists and support staff. However, although this might have been a strong argument as little as five years ago, times are changing fast, and the benefits to patients of having the individual elements of the pharmacy service regulated as a whole outweigh the disadvantages. The General Dental Council, for example, successfully extended its regulatory processes to encompass hygienists and therapists in the 1980s and is seeking now to embrace technicians and nurses.

Readers can contribute their views on the issue by completing our survey.

Back to Top