| • White paper (9)
• Commissioning
• Statins (2)
• NHS
• Community pharmacy
• Pharmacy education
Letters to the Editor
|
Pharmacy education
Need to develop new infrastructure
From Mrs L. M. O’Loan, MRPharmS, and others
Cheryl Davis and Sharon Steel suggest in a Broad
spectrum article that “traditional
postgraduate education and training needs a makeover” (PJ, 10 February,
p162) if quality clinical pharmacy services are to be delivered in the
community. They highlight the need for competency-based training programmes
combined with the practical application of knowledge and skills in the
workplace, robust assessment, and support networks (ie, vocational education
and training) for community-based pharmacists to help them “replicate
the success” of their hospital colleagues. In some parts of the UK,
collaboration between hospitals, NHS pharmacy education and training organisations
and higher education institutions has enabled pharmacists (and pharmacy
support staff) to undertake this type of vocational education and training.
We agree with their suggestions and would like to make three comments.
First, we believe that, in order to deliver quality clinical pharmacy services,
all members of the pharmacy workforce (pharmacists, pharmacy technicians
and assistants) need to be developed to reach their full potential. This
would facilitate the effective pharmacy skill mix described in the Health
Act 2006, whereby pharmacy assistants dispense prescriptions and pharmacy
technicians carry out the final accuracy check, allowing pharmacists to
take on patient-centred medicines management roles, including prescribing.
Secondly, we think that the competencies necessary for pharmacists to undertake
patient-centred medicines management roles in community, primary and secondary
care settings are covered by the general level competency framework (GLF)
(PJ, 9 July 2005, p48 (PDF 100K)). In our view, there would
be benefits for the whole profession if newly registered pharmacists working
in these
settings embarked
on a unified vocational education and training programme linked to the
GLF, developing them to become general pharmacy practitioners able to carry
out such roles. Thereafter, pharmacists wishing to specialise could undertake
advanced vocational education and training, ultimately leading them to
become consultant pharmacy practitioners or pharmacists with a special
interest. We believe that similar competency frameworks, and vocational
education and training programmes (such as foundation degrees), should
be developed for all newly qualified pharmacy technicians working in community,
primary and secondary care settings, to enable them to take on the extended
roles outlined in the Health Act 2006.
Thirdly, we agree that there would be resource implications associated
with reforming postgraduate pharmacy education and training. Nonetheless,
the challenge of obtaining additional funding has not been a barrier to
the professions of medicine and nursing. In our opinion, the other main
challenge would be developing and implementing the necessary infrastructure
to deliver such changes across the profession. Perhaps this is a role for
the proposed new “royal college” (PJ, 24 February, p207).
Laura O’Loan
Acting Assistant Director
Colin Adair
Director
Julie Jordan
Technician Training Co-ordinator
Northern Ireland Centre for Postgraduate Pharmaceutical Education and Training |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal