The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7469 p289
15 September 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 70K, Acrobat Reader

• The profession (3)
• NPC (3)
• Community pharmacy
• Prescription pricing
• Wholesaling
• Anticoagulation
• Dispensing
• The Society (3)
• Regulation
• Fees consultation (2)
• Retention fees (2)
• Listening friends
• The Journal

Letters to the Editor

National Prescribing Centre (NPC)

NPC is not tasked to keep drugs budget under control

From Dr N. Maskrey, FRCGP, and Mr S. Morris, MRPharmS

We write in response to your editorial “Will we carry inserts again?” (PJ, 8 September, p248).

In January 2007, the National Prescribing Centre had 68 trainers, 21 of whom were seconded for around 30 days a year to deliver therapeutic workshops to primary care trust prescribing advisers, practice pharmacists and others. Most of those were experienced prescribing managers working in PCTs or strategic health authorities.

They were, therefore, engaged in delivering improvements in clinically and cost effective prescribing, which includes statin prescribing, and in running therapeutic workshops for their colleagues, including the management of cardiovascular risk and hypercholesterolaemia. They were and are, therefore, a group of enthusiastic, committed and highly intelligent people who are all extremely knowledgeable about the complex evidence in that area — currently one of the highest priorities for the NHS.

It is hardly surprising that, having received the document supported by AstraZeneca, that a small number of NPC trainers were among those who wrote to The Pharmaceutical Journal. The letters published by The Pharmaceutical Journal were, of course, sent by them as individuals. The concerns expressed in their responses were clearly justified given the unequivocal ruling from the Prescription Medicines Code of Practice Authority that found the article had broken so many of the code’s principles.

However, we agree with you that potential competing interests should be declared by all who write articles to or who correspond with The Pharmaceutical Journal.

Steps have already been taken to make all NPC trainers aware of the need to declare that status. Checklists for authors and correspondents, and routine publication within The Journal of relevant declared competing interests would help reinforce the need for consistent implementation of this policy.

Finally, we wish to point out that the NPC, even inter alia, is not “tasked to keep the NHS drugs bill under control”. Our aim is to “promote and support high quality, cost-effective prescribing and medicines management across the NHS, to help improve patient care and service delivery” and this is our sole “agenda”. This may mean promoting and supporting policies which increase, decrease, or leave the NHS drugs bill unchanged.

As NHS servants we unashamedly have a public sector perspective but are committed to working now and in the future with all parties including, where appropriate and possible, the pharmaceutical industry.

Neal Maskrey
Director of Evidence-Based Therapeutics
Steve Morris
Director of Strategic Development and Operations
National Prescribing Centre

Beggars belief

From Mr C. Anton

It beggars belief that you equate in your leading article, “Will we carry inserts again?” (PJ, 8 September, p248), the agenda of a public body designed to promote cost-effective and affordable drugs for the NHS and that of a public limited company whose raison d’être is to boost the funds of its shareholders.

It read like an Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry release.

Christopher Anton
Administrative Co-ordinator
West Midlands Centre for Adverse Drug Reactions,
Birmingham

NPC counters propaganda from the pharmaceutical industry

From Mr T. J. Slaughter, MRPharmS

I was disappointed to read your editorial (PJ, 8 September, p248) on the issue of sponsored inserts and your swipe at the comments related to pharmacists working at the National Prescribing Centre. The National Prescribing Centre has worked for a number of years to educate prescribers and all those involved with prescribing with impartial evidence-based information on prescribing.

This has been done to counter the propaganda from so many of the pharmaceutical companies, on a fraction of their budget.

The role of the NPC of “supporting activities that … keep the NHS drugs bill under control” is a side effect of its activities, rather than its goal.

I have no links with the National Prescribing Centre.

Tim Slaughter
Cumberland Infirmary
Carlisle

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (The profession)
Next Topic (Community pharmacy)