The Pharmaceutical Journal Vol 268 No 7191 465-468
6 April 2002

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

  CPD
  Childhood vaccination
  Prescribing
  Control of entry
  Checking technicians
  The Society
  

Letters to the Editor

Checking technicians

Let us do our job

From Mrs S. Norgain

Does Syd Bashford (PJ, 23 March, p397) not have faith in his staff to wager such unnecessary criticism of the move towards accredited checking technicians.
Technicians are not just tablet counters, doing all the peripheral jobs. I have undertaken a BTEC in Pharmaceutical Science and the accredited checking technician course is a continuation of my studies. It is the combined knowledge of these courses, continuing on the job training along with hands-on experience that we put to use when checking. We are trained in the “physical process” of checking. When a final check is done I have learnt how and what to check, common errors to be aware of and, importantly, I cannot check something I have dispensed. When I do a final check I can concentrate solely on that job as I have been taught to do.
There is not necessarily going to be the “inevitable error” any more than a pharmacist may make an error dispensing and checking all day by themselves.
Technicians should be allowed to do the job they have been trained to, and so help pharmacists do theirs.

Susan Norgain
Pharmacy Technician, University Hospital Aintree

Issue boils down to training and trust

From Mr A. M. Murdock, MRPharmS

The fears that Syd Bashford portrays (PJ, 23 March, p397) concerning pharmacy’s potential use of accredited checking technicians are the very reasons why the concept must be tried, evaluated and reviewed. More importantly, acceptance on a large scale will only occur if open, constructive debate also happens within the profession so that any concerns are aired and resolved. Too often pharmacy has backed itself into corners and got its proverbial knickers in a twist simply because debate has centred around theoretical positions and postulations rather than being coloured by fact.
What we are considering is not new. It happens in hospitals up and down the land with great effectiveness. The question is, can this transfer to community pharmacy? I believe that it can.
With the logistical pressures in the profession mounting, created by prescription volume increases, new roles and clinical governance, this may be one part of the solution to the jigsaw. Mr Bashford seems cynical at the training requirements for ACTs and may have misinterpreted the original article (PJ, 9 March, p317). It is not simply a “two-day residential course”. As far as we at Lloydspharmacy are concerned it is a competency- and test-based accreditation available to NVQ 3 technicians with a minimum of two years’ experience.
As for pharmacist accountability, is this an issue? Of course it is. But will someone explain to me how the delegation of the proposed dispensing under a standard operating procedure and the associated accountability issues differs from the relationship between a superintendent pharmacist and the pharmacists for whom he or she is accountable? It boils down to good training, competent staff, robust systems and trust.

Andy Murdock
Superintendent Pharmacist, Lloydspharmacy

Who’s flying the plane?

From Mr P. J. Trafford, MRPharmS

I woke at 2am in a cold sweat, having experienced a horrendous nightmare. I had booked a bargain holiday and, having just taken off, was settling into my window seat with a good book. As the stewardess walked down the aisle, I idly asked her who the chap in uniform was who left the plane just before take-off. “That was the pilot,” she replied. Sensing my panic, she added: “Oh, don’t worry. The stewardess who is flying the plane has been accredited. And, in any case, the flight is under the supervision of the pilot who you saw get off.” What a stupid dream! As if the pilot’s professional body would allow a company to cut costs by fooling the public in this way. Totally absurd!

Philip Trafford
Scarborough, North Yorkshire

Back to Top

Previous Topic (Control of entry)
Next Topic (The Society)
Send your letter to The Editor