|
Tanya Samuels, Paula Hayes and Matthew
Shaw are
from the Centre for Pharmacy Workforce
Studies at the University of Manchester
|
There is surprisingly little research about pharmacy technicians.
There are no reliable data on their numbers, deployment or educational
qualifications.
There is some information on hospital technicians, but it tends to be
fragmented and is not available in a format to enable a comprehensive,
national profile of this group to be developed. Less is known about technicians
and support staff in community pharmacy.
Nevertheless, support staff are at the centre of important developments
with the forthcoming regulation of pharmacy technicians. Regulation of
health workers was prioritised in the government report “Learning
from Bristol”, which emphasised the link between the quality of
care delivered to patients and the calibre of health workers. The Government
recommends the regulation of support staff and those whose work has a
direct impact on patient care.
Regulation should ensure the development of more consistent standards
of practice. Training is at the heart of the regulatory process: regulation
will establish minimum standards of training for entry into the profession
and a requirement for pharmacy technicians to undertake ongoing training
or continuing professional development.
Regulation provides another opportunity to examine skill mix and to review
the respective roles of the pharmacy team to ensure that the skills and
talents of the team are used to provide a quality service. For skill
mix to be successful trained and competent staff are required who are
willing to pursue different or extended roles. Developments in training
should reflect the changing roles of members in the pharmacy team.
The value of technician training and development is widely accepted in
pharmacy circles. However, work carried out by the Centre for Pharmacy
Postgraduate Education examining the training needs of pharmacy technicians,
in order to identify areas where the CPPE may provide support with CPD,
suggests that, in some workplaces, poor planning and execution of training,
and difficulties accessing training may waste the limited resources that
are available for training.
The CPPE held two focus groups in February with pharmacy technicians
from hospital, primary care, community and prison pharmacy. Although
only a few groups were arranged, the work revealed a core of qualified
pharmacy technicians who were eager to pursue further training, develop
their skills and expand their roles. Pharmacy technicians reported that
the demand for post-basic technician training currently outstrips supply.
However, without careful planning and consultation, and due consideration
for skill mix initiatives, technician training could become a paper-collecting
exercise, adding little to the improvement of the quality of services
or expansion of the role of technicians.
Comments made by technicians suggest that the training needs of the individual
and the workplace are not clearly defined, and there is sometimes a lack
of clarity about workplace needs or priorities, which should inform the
development of training programmes.
Technicians claimed to take responsibility for identifying their own
training needs, which may not be as straightforward as it appears: some
technicians had difficulty reflecting on their work in a way that would
enable them to identify areas where training may help them perform more
effectively. For example, technicians in the prison sector were keen
to pursue the clinical pharmacy diploma yet, on reflection, several acknowledged
that one of the main difficulties they encountered was communicating
with patients with behavioural or learning difficulties or those receiving
psychiatric care.
Similarly, decisions concerning the selection of individuals for training
may be rather spontaneous, and may not be sufficiently rigorous to match
the individual with the requirements of the workplace. Pharmacy technicians
said that managers tended to be influenced by such factors as length
of service, time since attending previous training and levels of morale,
and sometimes selected staff at random to attend training.
These comments imply that the training needs of the individual and the
workplace are not always well co-ordinated. Managers need to consider
the skills, capabilities and characteristics of their staff and relate
them to the goals and priorities for the workplace, and to identify appropriate
training requirements. Ideally the training priorities should be identified
in consultation with all staff, which will help to refine the process
and encourage the commitment of the staff.
There is a large practical element associated with many of the training
programmes available for pharmacy technicians and a high degree of employer
involvement in the training is needed. There are no published figures
available on the number of support staff who enrol for training, successfully
complete the training, or do so within the expected time frames. However,
anecdotal evidence and comments from the focus groups suggest that a
number of technicians have difficulty in completing training, because
managers tend to underestimate the amount of support that technicians
require.
Some pharmacy technicians said that managers did not always release them
from their normal duties to do the course work, whereas others could
not access computers, the internet or pharmacy records during working
hours in order to complete their assignments. This may be because managers
do not always recognise the value of a particular training programme.
A number of pharmacy technicians expressed frustration that the skills
they had acquired in training were not being put to good use. Some complained
about the lack of opportunity to apply their new skills and feared they
were in danger of being lost. Others faced the opposite predicament,
and complained they were ill-prepared for the additional tasks that managers
placed upon them after training. This suggests that managers sometimes
confuse qualifications for competence in a particular area. Furthermore,
these anxieties were sometimes perceived by managers as reluctance on
the part of technicians to expand into new areas. Few of the technicians
acknowledged having discussed with managers, before training, the subsequent
application of their new skills. It is paramount for pharmacy technicians
and managers to have a shared understanding of how to apply their new
skills, and what kind of support technicians will require, to gain experience
and the confidence needed to perform effectively. Unless this is done
there is a danger that staff will slip back into their old patterns of
work, and lose hope and enthusiasm for role expansion.
The supply of staff in pharmacies must match the demands to the job.
Personal profiles are not just for recruitment. An audit of the workplace
requirements and a considered assessment of the skills of existing staff,
the specific training requirements for each member of staff to enable
him or her to extend their role, and a planned training programme, prepared
in consultation with the staff, with subsequent time frames will guarantee
success.
Skill mix is, or should be, a way of doing more with existing resources.
Employers and staff all have a part to play in introducing the concept
so skill mix must attempt to enhance the existing resources, but as with
all investments, success will only come if this is carefully planned
and managed. |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal