The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 276 No 7399 p532
6 May 2006

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 50K, Acrobat Reader

· Agenda for Change
· Independent prescribing
· Emergency contraception
· Statistics (2)
· Medicines use reviews (2)
· Section 60 Order
· Education
· The Society

Letters to the Editor

Medicines use reviews

The current regulation is nonsense

From Dr D. Petty, MRPharmS

Alun Philips is correct to say that it should be GPs doing the reviews on patients with under-treated conditions such as ischaemic heart disease where an additional treatment is needed (PJ, 29 April, p504), although I would argue that pharmacists with access to the clinical record could do this also

In my letter (PJ, 15 April, p440) I was talking about “medication reviews” and this was changed throughout by The Journal to “medicines use reviews (MURs)”. These changes were done without my approval and change the meaning of the letter. Most pharmacists will know that MURs are not medication reviews. MURs are intended to assess the patient’s current problems with medicines and their administration. Medication reviews also include an assessment of the appropriateness of the medication and need access to the full clinical record, as well as the patient.

Mr Philips pointed out that MURs can only be done for an individual patient once a year. This current regulation is nonsense and I hope the Department of Health will alter this now that everybody has had some experience of doing reviews. MURs are about medicines partnership. Medicines partnership requires the pharmacist to build a relationship and trust with the patient. This cannot be done over 20 minutes once a year. MURs may require follow up or the patient may have further questions they want to ask. The patient’s situation and medicines could change before the year is up. MURs should be done as frequently as the pharmacist considers necessary. Imagine GPs or practice nurses only being able to review their patients once a year.

Duncan Petty
Practice Pharmacist, Bradford, and
Lecturer School of Healthcare, University of Leeds

Is there a correct figure for how many MURs have been done?

From Mr S. Vohra, MRPharmS

In The Pharmaceutical Journal of 8 April, in the Broad spectrum article — “Ready, steady, pause and take stock! Time to reflect on medicines use review” (p414) — the authors from the University of Hertfordshire state that the latest figures are that 33,000 MURs have been completed. However, on p415 of the same issue, in response to the letter “Need to reconsider 10-minute campaign”, Andy Murdock, pharmacy director at Lloydspharmacy, says that his company alone has so far undertaken 50,000 MURs.

Which figure is correct? Is there a correct, up-to-date figure for this?

Samir Vohra
Community Pharmacy Development Specialist
Chorley and South Ribble Primary Care Trust

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Statistics)
Next Topic (Section 60 Order)