Home > PJ (current issue) > News / News Centre | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 272 No 7288 p235
28 February 2004

This article
Reprint
Photocopy


News summary


AAH welcomes contract delay as opportunity to iron out difficulties

Delaying implementation of the new pharmacy contract for England and Wales until October (PJ, 21 February, p205) has been welcomed by AAH Pharmaceuticals as “a much-needed opportunity to iron out numerous imponderables”.

AAH’s group managing director Steve Dunn said that the planned launch this April had never been realistic and that the delay gave time to deliver the contract in a workable fashion. “There are still many areas to be worked on, such as funding for consultation areas. Is the pharmacist expected to foot the bill for something that is being imposed? What about premises that are simply too small?” Mr Dunn is also concerned that issues surrounding information technology remain to be resolved. He asked: “How will a common model be deployed to record patient interactions and how will this link with a reimbursement system to ensure the pharmacist is paid?” He also has concerns about Government moves to cut the reimbursement prices of generic medicines.

October is not that far off, he warns. By then, community pharmacists are expected to develop new skills and services and to change radically the way they run their businesses. “It is a monumental step-change calling for considerable investment, when the real details of the new contract, including remuneration and return on investment, are still shrouded in mystery.”

John D’Arcy, chief executive of the National Pharmaceutical Association, said that April 2004 had always been an ambitious target. Incredible progress has already been made, given that funding the new contract was always been expected to be complex. “It will be far better to get things worked out properly, than to rush things through.” The downside of missing the deadline was that community pharmacists faced another wait before being paid for what they did, rather than according to prescription volume.

Back to Top


Home | Journals | News | Notice-board | Search | Jobs  Classifieds | Site Map | Contact us

©The Pharmaceutical Journal