The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 273 No 7329 p850-851
11 December 2004

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 100K, Acrobat Reader

· New contract (5)
· PPRS
· Registration exam (4)
· Prescription forms
· Community pharmacy
· Male health
· Competency
· Public health
· Alcohol
· Levithyroxine
· Complementary medicine
· The register (3)
· Retention fee
· The Journal (2)

Letters to the Editor

Registration exam

Who is benefiting?

From Ms N. Hampson, MRPharmS

I am writing to add my concerns to those already expressed regarding the relevance and validity of the registration examination. My personal experience of the examination (taken in 1995) was that, at the end of a rewarding and enlightening preregistration year, it presented me with a final bureaucratic hurdle to overcome before gaining registration. It tested my memory and my ability to check reference books against the clock, but it did not allow me to demonstrate the knowledge and skills which I had gained during my preregistration year.

Since qualifying, I have completed a diploma in clinical pharmacy and, more recently, qualified as a supplementary prescriber. Both of these qualifications focused on learning in practice, competence-based learning, Objective Structured Clinical Examinations and reflection, all of which are being used more frequently to assess the competence of our health care colleagues in the medical and nursing professions. These more modern methods of assessment seem to me to be more relevant in the production of a rounded, clinically aware and patient-oriented pharmacist. I would urge members of the Council to review the current examination and ask themselves who is it benefiting.

N. Hampson
Nottingham

Exam inconsistent with philosophy of CPD

From Miss R. N. Price, MRPharmS

Sultan Dajani’s Broad spectrum article (PJ, 13 November, p712) poses some thought provoking questions.

At a time when it has been recognised that pharmacists (like all health care professionals) should be committed to life-long learning and development through the introduction of mandatory continuing professional development, it seems inconsistent that to be able to register is dependent on an assessment made in a contrived and time-limited situation.

I would urge the Society to debate and revise its registration procedure.

Ruth Price
Carrog, Corwen

Trainees should be supported

From Mr J. M. Patel, MRPharmS

I write to add my voice to those calling for the registration exam to be reformed or scrapped. Many of the problems with the current system have been eloquently discussed in recent issues of the PJ but I would like to further discuss the moral issues.

The Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s current position can be described as follows: those who fail three attempts at the examination pose such a risk to the public that they should be permanently excluded from the profession to which they have already committed four or five years of their lives.

No one doubts the importance of protecting the public but it could also be argued that the public will be endangered by the effect of stopping these people from joining an overstretched workforce. If people are to be made to feel that they have essentially wasted the past few years of their lives then this decision should be based on strong evidence. Where is this evidence?

I find it hard to believe that it is beyond our wits to protect both the public and those who want to become pharmacists; other correspondents have made suggestions for how to proceed. People who have already failed three attempts have been wronged and deserve another chance. Pharmacy students deserve the assurance that they will be supported if they struggle in their preregistration phase — and not be merely cast adrift.

Jason Patel
Birmingham

Need to get the basics right

From Ms J. S. Razzaq, MRPharms

The registration examination is the determining factor as to whether you qualify as a pharmacist. I do agree that we should have an examination but it must be vocationally based. It is still a theory examination and the vast majority of us are not research scientists. We need to be tested on core skills such as communication, applying theory to practice, decision-making and teamwork. There is no point in learning vast amounts of theory if you cannot make a simple intervention. Let us get the basics right.

Incidentally, there should not be a limit of how many times to take the preregistration examination. Surely we should be concerned with the quality of the end product.

Jabeen Razzaq
Bolton, Lancashire

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (PPRS)
Next Topic (Prescription forms)