|
· Community pharmacy
· Obesity
· Prescription fraud
· ADR reporting
· Careers supplement
Letters to the Editor
|
Community pharmacy
Out-of-hours cover could lead to working unreasonable hours
From Dr I. Ab I. Davies, MRPharmS
I read with interest the leading
article (PJ, 28 February, p234) suggesting
that the new general medical services contract offers opportunities for
pharmacists to contribute to out-of-hours care. Indeed, the pharmacy
strategy for Northern Ireland (PJ, 14 February, p180) suggests that “late
opening of pharmacies might be a better option than 24-hour emergency
on-call cover”.
Most pharmacies with a single pharmacist or proprietor are open from
9am to 6pm, six days a week. Full cover for the six days would constitute
a 54-hour week. The availability of a locum for one day a week would
still involve the pharmacist in a 45-hour week. Extending the opening
hours to offer out-of-hours care would increase the working time of pharmacists
well beyond that which would be considered reasonable. Few of these pharmacies,
I would suggest, could afford the luxury of employing a second pharmacist
full time or even part time.
Why are GPs opting out? Perhaps they have come to realise that 24-hour
cover is not only unreasonable but also potentially dangerous, especially
when they are called out at frequent intervals outside normal surgery
hours.
I. Ab I. Davies
Ballygowan, Co Down
Employees' time should be valued
From Mr A. Matalia, MRPharmS
I read Mike Jones’s letter (PJ, 13 March, p318) with interest.
He values his time at £70 per hour. Since I have not worked in
community pharmacy for a number of years, I, too, would be inclined to
value my time at a similar figure.
I have noted that many pharmacy owners also value their time at similar
rates, but wonder why they value the time of their professional colleagues
(eg, locums or employees) at only 25 per cent of this figure, and thereby
give their ultimate paymasters (the Government) the ammunition to argue
that pharmacists are only worth this amount. This seems to be reflected
in NHS remuneration.
The day employers value their employees at £70 per hour will be
the day they can justify a substantial increase in the global sum and
pharmacy can be legitimately viewed as a profession.
Sadly, this seems a “chicken and egg” situation. Only the
employer can take the initiative.
A. Matalia
Coventry
OTC products should be supplied in child resistant containers
From Mr L. Kumwenda, MRPharmS
As part of risk management, I think regulatory authorities should
re-visit the issue of child resistant containers, with a view to extending
the requirement to most over-the-counter products.
Currently, manufacturers are not required to supply certain OTC medicines
in child resistant containers. I am particularly concerned with OTC medicines
that contain sedative antihistamines, decongestants, opium tincture,
methyl salicylate and senna, to name a few.
It is obvious that pharmacists’ efforts to minimise risk by supplying
prescription medicines in child resistant containers is negated by OTC
products being supplied in ordinary containers.
If accidentally swallowed, medicines pose a health risk irrespective
of whether they are in the prescription-only, pharmacy or general sale
list category.
Luso Kumwenda
Swansea
|
The
Pharmaceutical Journal