The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 276 No 7390 p265
4 March 2006

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 80K, Acrobat Reader

· Methadone mixture
· Brand prescribing
· Oxygen services
· BuTrans and the SMC
· The profession (4)
· The Society
· Reciprocity
· CPD

Letters to the Editor

Continuing professional development (CPD)

A bureaucratic impediment and not constructive assistance

From Dr M. J. Shott, MRPharmS

Julian Gilbert (PJ, 11 February, p168) and Stephen Mather (PJ, 25 February, p233) have expressed concern and confusion about how to implement continuing professional development in industrial and academic practice. As an industrial pharmacist directing research into dosage form development, I spend a considerable amount of my time, and my employer’s money, keeping abreast of the scientific literature and attending congresses. However, since I am seeking to keep myself up to date with new developments with no specific learning need in mind, I share Professor Mather’s view that this does not fit into the CPD recording cycle expected by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society.

Given sufficient effort, I could force some of my activities to fit into an acceptable form for a record, but the activities I already undertake are best adapted to the particular area of pharmacy in which I practise, and this seems to make CPD a bureaucratic impediment rather than a constructive assistance to good practice. If learning how to master a Microsoft Word function is acceptable as CPD, as has been suggested in The Journal (PJ, 30 August 2003, p265 PDF (210K)), then why is not attending a congress with the world leaders in my area of drug delivery, even if I have not identified any specific area where this will improve my professional practice?

Martin Shott
Ashtead, Surrey

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Reciprocity)