Quality of pharmacy CPD challenged at APPG inquiry
Anthony Smith questions quality of CPD |
Many courses offering continuing professional development for pharmacists are of questionable value, an inquiry into the future of pharmacy has been told.
At an evidence session for the All-Party Pharmacy Group’s inquiry
Anthony Smith, dean of the School of Pharmacy, University of London,
said: “I have strong issues about the quality of a lot of CPD.”
Professor Smith said that many courses offered by the postgraduate education
centres were not stretching the profession, adding: “My worry,
for many pharmacists doing that kind of course at that level, is that
they might think that’s where we are in terms of postgraduate education.”
Apart from the training that had been provided on emergency contraception
a lot of the courses are at an extremely low level and unchallenging,
he said.
Sandra Gidley, the pharmacist LibDem MP for Romsey, said that some courses
that were on offer from the Centre for Pharmacy Postgraduate Education
before she was elected to Parliament six years ago were so basic as to
be insulting to pharmacists, although some would have been challenging
to pharmacists who had been qualified for 10–30 years.
Howard Stoate, chairman of the APPG, asked what reassurance there was
that pharmacists could deliver to the required standard when a primary
care trust wanted to commission new services.
Sue Ambler, head of research and development at the Royal Pharmaceutical
Society, said that a distinction had to be made between maintaining professional
knowledge and making the jump to advanced practice. Pharmacy did not
have an equivalent model to the structured training of doctors to become
consultants. Formalising training beyond diploma, MSc and prescribing
courses would be the next big jump for the profession. |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal
Acrobat
Reader