| · Pharmacy in Spain
· Controlled drugs
· Community pharmacy
· Prescribing
· Medicines use reviews
· Safety (2)
· Supermarket pharmacy
· The profession (4)
· The Council
· Statutory Committee
· Retention fee
· Section 60 Order
· The Society
· Pfizer products
Letters to the Editor
|
The profession
Encouraged and guided
From Miss J. de Val, MRPharmS
The importance of science in the study and practice of pharmacy has
always been recognised by the British Pharmaceutical Students Association.
It was with some interest then to read the comments
by Alexander Florence (PJ, 28 October, p516–517).
It is clear that the role of pharmacy in health care, and the role of
the pharmacist therefore, has changed a great deal in recent years. Thanks
to the proactive members of our profession, we now have enhanced and
advanced services under the new community pharmacy contract, we have
the first pharmacist prescribers and we even have the first consultant
pharmacist posts.Pharmacy students are aware of the highly varied career
that they can carve out for themselves, working in any sector of pharmacy
with the same degree and moving between these sectors to create a portfolio
career. How does pharmacy education keep up with this? Perhaps there
may be some responses to this as a result of the Royal Pharmaceutical
Society’s education consultation.
Frequently newly qualified community pharmacists now manage their own
pharmacy, often with little training in how to manage a workplace or
staff. BPSA members have called for management training to be incorporated
into the MPharm degree. These students realise that they are likely to
be in a management role and wish to be prepared, so they may do it with
excellence, not just competence. Management subjects are not desired
because they are “softer options” but because they are what
the profession has led us to believe we will benefit from.
Science in the MPharm degree is highly valued by the BPSA. The BPSA executive
participates in the science working committee of the European Pharmaceutical
Students’ Association, which encourages dialogue between European
pharmacy students about science education and research. Perhaps wider
use of this interesting tool should be a priority for the association.
The BPSA also works with the Society to run a science-based programme
for students’ day at the British Pharmaceutical Conference.
The BPSA executive and members are some of the most proactive pharmacy
students and it is inevitable that they will go on to play an active
role when they qualify and practise. They should be encouraged and guided
because they are the profession’s future.
Jennifer de Val
President
British Pharmaceutical Students’ Association
Getting our image right
From Mr D. G. Carr, MRPharmS
Congratulations to Alexander Florence on his analysis
of the public’s
(and others’) view of pharmacy (PJ, 28 October, pp516–17).
In my early days after qualifying I spent six years in two reasonably
upmarket pharmacies — glass bottle displays, drug runs, white demi
and white coats — albeit supported by a good perfumery and photographic
departments. Free time, however, was at a premium with a five-and-a-half-day
week, a one in three rota and no time for sport. So I joined a pharmaceutical
company as a medical representative and was horrified at the state of
some of the pharmacies I visited.
No doubt things have improved somewhat since I “left the road” 25
years ago but our image is still blighted by displays of junk that should
never see the inside of a pharmacy. If business is bad enough to require
shoring up with non-medically related merchandise then the pharmacist
should get out and find a proper professional position elsewhere.
Perhaps the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s inspectorate could grade
premises on its visits and issue some “improve or else” certificates
where “or else” could be a doubling of the annual retention
fee for the premises. Such a punishment would be better if the NHS was
not so parsimonious but if we do not get our image right we will never
improve our standing as a profession and get paid what we are worth.
D. G. Carr
Bookham, Surrey
Does the title MPharm devalue the profession?
From Mr D. Lee, MRPharmS
Are we devaluing the profession by describing graduates of a first degree
course with the title master of pharmacy? I believed that a master’s
degree was conferred after completing a postgraduate degree that included
a thesis. Are we to believe that the fourth year of a pharmacy degree
in the UK allows enough time for original research and the writing up
of a thesis? In which other science degree could a master’s degree
be gained in this way?
It begs the questions: how does the UK compare with other countries that
have moved from a three- to a four-year pharmacy course? How does this
description compare to other professional degrees awarded in the UK,
such as dentistry, medicine and law? Are the pharmacy graduates who have
gone on to complete a master’s degree happy with this decision,
which in my view effectively negates their achievements?
Dan Lee
Queenstown, New Zealand
Falling on deaf ears
From Dr J. Scott, MRPharmS
The article summarising Alexander
Florence’s valedictory address
to Council (PJ, 28 October, pp516–7) brings to focus words and sentiments
that we have heard expressed before, by Professor Florence and many others
within academia.
Such is the familiarity with the messages made that one cannot help but
feel that these words are falling on deaf ears. One can visualise the future
demise of pharmacy as a profession distinct in its knowledge and expertise.
The pharmacist-prescriber will be seen as a “prescriber”, the
dispensing-pharmacist will be seen as a “dispenser”. The pharmacist
selling baby clothes, sandwiches and T-shirts will (and already is?) be
seen as a shopkeeper. As Professor Florence says, the need for specialist
knowledge on the development and use of medicines of the future will remain
and indeed grow.
The gap created by the lack of pharmacist’s knowledge and expertise
will be filled by others — the formulation scientist, the specialist
adviser in post-genomics technologies. It is only a matter of time before
Professor Florence and others will be able to say “I told you so”.
There are three clear responsibilities in avoiding the demise of pharmacy
as a profession. The first lies with individual members of the profession
and the corporations that employ most of them. They have to improve the
public image of pharmacy through, as Professor Florence says, the image
portrayed by all community pharmacies. The badging of pharmacies with NHS
livery has made some start on this but there is a great deal more to be
done.
The second responsibility lies with schools of pharmacy. We need to ensure
that we underpin our degree schemes with relevant pharmaceutical sciences
and, importantly, teach their application within pharmacy practice.
The third responsibility lies with those who employ our graduates as preregistration
trainees and newly qualified pharmacists. It is during these early years
that the foundations for professional practise are set. Our students need
to be allowed to practice what is taught, encouraged strongly through exemplar
mentors and tutors to maintain high standards, to take pride in their professional
abilities and to identify and develop opportunities. This is not mutually
exclusive from exploiting commercial development opportunities within health
care commissioning.
It is only then that the profession stands a chance of moving forward in
strength, with distinction and as a whole.
Jenny Scott
Lecturer in Pharmacy Practice
University of Bath |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal