Home > PJ (current issue) > Letters | Search

PJ Online homeThe Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 274 No 7339 p268-269
5 March 2005

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 75K, Acrobat Reader

Letters

· Problem-based learning
· Support staff (2)
· Co-proxamol
· Mental health
· New contract
· Repeat dispensing
· Overseas pharmacists (2)
· Registration
· Recruitment
· The profession


Letters to the Editor

Mental health

Time to reconsider mental health as a single specialty

From Mr J. P. M. Pratt, MRPharmS

It is disappointing that The Pharmaceutical Journal chose to print only a brief mention of the National Institute for Clinical Excellence guidelines on the short-term management of disturbed or violent behaviour (PJ, 26 February, p224). I would have expected that The Journal would have highlighted at least some of the recommendations that were of particular relevance to pharmacists or specialist pharmacists.

These guidelines provides us with comprehensive guidance on the range of interventions that we should be using to manage disturbed or violent behaviour. They do not deal with pharmacological treatments in isolation, but do recognise the important role that specialist pharmacists have as members of multidisciplinary teams using drugs to tranquillise people rapidly. They even make an explicit recommendation that “specialist mental health pharmacists should be members of multidisciplinary teams where rapid tranquillisation is being used”.

Clearly there will be a need for organisations to reconsider the constitution of multidisciplinary mental health teams to ensure the presence of a specialist mental health pharmacist. This also raises questions about where these pharmacists are going to come from and, perhaps more importantly, what qualifies someone as “a specialist mental health pharmacist”.

The specialisation of pharmacists is becoming accepted as the norm but, given the complexities and risks of medicines use, perhaps it is now time to reconsider mental health as a single specialty. Many organisations continue to employ pharmacists on the basis that they are expected to be “the” mental health specialist covering populations of several hundreds of thousands of people. Such an approach is almost tokenistic to the idea of multidisciplinary involvement. It is impossible for one person to be a member of all the multidisciplinary teams that use drug treatments in mental health.

Although there will clearly be some time before adequate numbers of pharmacists are available to join the majority of multidisciplinary mental health teams, the planning for this needs to happen now. Both undergraduate and postgraduate courses need to reflect that pharmacists will be expected to practise as “specialists” and not generic “pharmacists”.

As a profession we need to help support pharmacists to choose their area of specialisation. For those pharmacists who are unsure about whether or not they would want to specialise in any aspects of mental health we can still offer places on our “taster programme”, which has been funded through the national spread programme (see PJ, 20 November 2004, p749).

Peter Pratt
Chief Pharmacist, Sheffield Care Trust, and Chief Pharmacist,
Doncaster & South Humber NHS Trust

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Co-proxamol)
Next Topic (New contract)

Back to Top


©The Pharmaceutical Journal