The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 269 No 7221 p605-608
26 October 2002

This page
Reprint
Photocopy

PDF 68K

  Supervision
  Sociology
  Advertising
  Media
  CPD
  Materia Medica
  The profession
  Herbal medicines
  Patient packs

Letters to the Editor

CPD

Learnt nothing new from video

From Mr A. X. Paschalides, MRPharmS

I have just viewed the continuing professional development videotape sent out by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. I wish to voice my displeasure over the standard, style and content of the tape. It enlightened us not one iota as to the coming CPD, as regards to what it involves specifically, the amount of work, the records that need to be submitted or how it will be administrated. I learnt nothing new from this that I had not read about in the articles already published in The Pharmaceutical Journal.

I cannot believe that this videotape has been sent to every pharmacist. This strikes me as a gross waste of resources. Was the programme paid for by
our registration fees? Another wastage was the fact that our household was sent two copies of this tape because my wife and I are both pharmacists. Surely as they were being sent out someone should have picked up on this fact. Please try harder to reduce unnecessary waste and take more time to consider and plan any short film productions.

I would have thought that pharmacists possessed above average intelligence and as an audience should not be treated as simpletons to low budget, amateurish, quasi-scientific opinions of three or four real pharmacists (surely not actors judging by the standard) better suited to a daytime television slot on a mid-morning magazine programme.

This short video did not, in my opinion, include anything to assuage pharmacists’ fears about CPD or tell them anything they would not have already known from diligently reading the PJ.

A. X. Paschalides
Woodford Green, Essex

ROBERT DEWDNEY, head of the education division, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, replies:

I am grateful to Mr Paschalides for perhaps prompting those pharmacists who have not yet had time to watch the videotape to do so and to form their own opinions about it. “Introducing CPD” endeavours to capture in an easily accessible manner information about pharmacy CPD, especially for busy professionals who may not have followed all developments so far.

We, the producers of the tape, make no apology for filming six real pharmacists, two other health professionals and members of the public, interspersed with actors. “Introducing CPD” along with a further video (“CPD — Your next move”, specifically to support the roll-out) are joint productions of the Society and the Centre for Pharmacy Postgraduate Education, paid for by the two organisations alone.

As explained in the tape and in the PJ, the details of the CPD framework are being rolled out to pharmacists area by area over the next two years. Until the roll-out reaches them, pharmacists can find out more at www.rpsgb.org.uk/education/ in the CPD section.

Regarding two-pharmacist households, identifying such households would occupy significant staff time, a cost in itself. More importantly, who are we to make assumptions about the wishes and “dynamics” within such households?

There is no need for separate registers to be created

From Mr D. A. Hancox, MRPharmS

Further to your editorial, “Grasping the CPD nettle”, published in last week’s Pharmaceutical Journal, perhaps we should all fully recognise that continuing professional development is applicable to all pharmacists whether clinical, academic, industrial, administrative, superintendent, area or regional manager or infrequent locum.

All pharmacists surely have a responsibility to keep up to date and develop, knowledge, skills and competence that are relevant to their area of practice. In addition, all pharmacists will undoubtedly benefit from the preparation, implementation and maintenance of a personal professional development plan throughout their careers.

I have no doubt that all responsible pharmacists, including those employed infrequently as locum pharmacists, engage in a variety of activities that maintain and develop their knowledge, skills and competence. Documentation of these activities should provide adequate CPD records that are acceptable to the Royal Pharmaceutical Society. Those who are not responsible should surely not be practising.

If we can all accept this viewpoint there is no need to create separate registers. All pharmacists will be able, at any time, clearly to demonstrate their fitness to practise in their chosen area.

The challenge facing the Society is one of developing an appraisal system for CPD records that recognises the individual nature of every pharmacist’s practice, provides supportive feedback to the pharmacist and meets specific requirements that may be laid down by the Government. It is encouraging to read (PJ, 5 October, pp478–9) that it is addressing this challenge.

Douglas Hancox
Auckland, New Zealand

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Media)
Next Topic (Materia Medica)