Which? hunt
Rosie Winterton, health minister with responsibility for pharmacy, was full of encouraging words for the profession when she spoke at a Royal Pharmaceutical Society dinner earlier this week. Commenting on the Which? report into the quality of advice available from community pharmacies (p143), she said she shared the Society’s disappointment with the findings, because the Government has a great deal of confidence in the services provided by the profession. She also supported the Society’s decision to investigate some of the shortcomings of pharmacists outlined in the report — although whether or not this will be possible will depend on the co-operation of Which? and the magazine’s publisher, the Consumers’ Association, in releasing more details about the research. It may turn out to be more of a Which? hunt than a witch hunt.
While the profession should not be complacent about the findings, and
there is clearly room for improvement in the advice given by some pharmacists,
the report should also be a warning to the Government about the potential
problems raised when patients are offered too much choice and shop around
for advice. Health care professionals need to be familiar with their
patients in order to provide the best of care. This principle may be
undermined by those Government initiatives that are being put in place
more to satisfy patients’ convenience rather than necessarily being
good for their health.
If, for example, the Which? researchers had been known to the pharmacists
and staff from whom they sought advice, the quality provided would inevitably
have been higher. If a customer is about to go on a trip to the far east
and seeks advice from a pharmacist about health precautions, the chances
are that he or she will go to the same pharmacy if they are suffering
from diarrhoea on their return. Moreover, patients have responsibilities
to tell pharmacists as many relevant details as they can — and
not always wait for the questions.
As a consequence of the Which? report, pharmacists should not feel that
they do not do a good job. Rather, they should recognise there is room
for improvement and aim to provide high quality advice at all times.
And those responsible for health policy in England should read The
Journal’s
report last week (p115) about the introduction of a national
minor ailments treatment scheme based at pharmacies in Scotland and recognise the many
benefits of making patients register with a pharmacy. Continuity of care
is just as important in pharmacy as it is in medicine.
Back to Top
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal