| · Medicines use reviews
· COX-2s
· Registration
· Other professions
· Prescription charges
· CPD
· Fitness to practise
Letters to the Editor
|
Medicines use reviews
Instigation date should not be relevant
From Dr E. K. Rosenbloom, MRPharmS
I am writing to express my concerns regarding the access to funding
for delivering the additional 50 medicines use reviews (MURs) for those
pharmacists who have instigated the service before 1 January 2006. I
accept that many pharmacists may not reach the 250 limit before April
2006, but the funding for the additional 50 MURs should be available
to all pharmacists who are able to develop their workforce to support
this service delivery.
I applaud the stakeholders who have recognised the need to review the
implementation of the community pharmacy contractual framework but believe
that additional MUR funding should focus upon quality and patient indicators
not “a date of service introduction”. Many pharmacists are
at present focusing upon the essential service component of contractual
framework and dealing with “housework” issues to support
local pharmacy monitoring visits. To many this additional implementation
hurdle may seem unfair.
Pharmacists have invested in and refitted their pharmacies and are in
the process of gaining MUR accreditation. Marketing tools and communication
systems are also developing slowly. The process is impeded by so many
GPs being reticent to support a service that they know nothing about.
Partnership working with our primary care colleagues is required to support
and engage fellow health professionals; this all takes time. Some pharmacies
plan to employ additional staff in the new year once they have been given
a green light on their essential services. I believe that all accredited
pharmacists should be allowed to deliver up to 250 MURs per accredited
pharmacy irrespective of when they instigate the service, if the service
is appropriate.
Karen Rosenbloom
Health and Social Care Adviser
Hertfordshire Local Pharmaceutical Committee
|