The Pharmaceutical Journal
Vol 279 No 7470 p326
22 September 2007

This article
Reprint   Photocopy

PDF 40K, Acrobat Reader

• Sponsored inserts (3)
• Dose administration aids
• White Paper
• Prescribing
• 100-hour pharmacies
• Retention fees
• The Society (2)

Letters to the Editor

100-hour pharmacies

In the long run additional hours will need additional funding

From Mr M. Bennett, MRPharmS

I was interested to read your leader and the article describing the experiences of 100-hour pharmacies (PJ, 25 August, p196 and p201). As a pharmacist who has been involved in providing services in extended-hours pharmacies since 1970 I can speak from experience.

My view is that providing extended-hours services is useful for the public and can be enjoyable and challenging for staff. The downside is that it is an expensive service to provide both financially and in the use of relative scarce resources such as pharmacists’ time.

An extended-hours pharmacy service in an area needs to be planned, ideally via the primary care trust. For instance, in Sheffield, where I am based, with a population of 600,000 and a pretty good transport system to the centre, an ideal system would have four or five strategically placed pharmacies open longer hours, until, say, 7.30 or 8 pm Monday to Friday, plus three other pharmacies open until 10pm every day (say two city centre and one mall-based).

In a perfect world one of these would also offer an overnight service possibly via a bell and buzzer arrangement similar to some of the “urgent pharmacies” in New Zealand.

That would be a well designed service, but it would need additional funding. The standard fees obtained from dispensing NHS prescriptions and from selling medicines will not match the costs incurred in providing a quality pharmacy service in the vast majority of cases.

My message to the young pharmacists keen to own their own businesses is that they look carefully at the cost side of the equation. Will they be willing to continue subsidising the loss generating hours in five years’ time? They should also look at opportunities for standard contracts.

Under the old regulations, pharmacists managed to open new pharmacies, but it did take some research and a little work to identify areas where a new contract application would succeed.

My message to those charged with reviewing the regulations is that the 100-hour exemption is not needed. The hours of opening should be considered alongside competition and choice within the normal contract application.

Where extended hours are required as part of the pharmaceutical needs analysis for that area, then a contract should be granted. Where there is an adequate service in that area then it should not.

In addition, in the long run, economic reality will dictate that additional hours will need additional funding.

Martin Bennett
Sheffield

Send your letter to The Editor

Previous Topic (Prescribing)
Next Topic (Retention fees)