|
Anthony Smith, principal and dean, and David
Taylor,
professor of pharmaceutical and public health policy, at the School
of Pharmacy, University of London
|
RESOURCES
University of London School of Pharmacy
“Greater
expectations: pharmacy-based health care — the future for Europe?” PDF 1.3MB
A
report of the House of Commons debate |
The Broad spectrum feature is
open to any reader. Contributions of around 1,100 words commenting
on topical issues
may be posted to Graeme Smith, managing editor, or
e-mailed to graeme.smith@pharmj.org.uk for consideration
|
Pharmacy is being increasingly expected by the public,
by policy makers and by members of other professions to extend its
contribution to effective
medicines use and the achievement of better health outcomes.
The University
of London School of Pharmacy’s latest policy paper (“Greater
expectations: pharmacy-based health care — the future for Europe?” PDF 1.3MB)
highlights the fact that across Europe members of the profession have
a historic opportunity to widen the range
of clinical and allied health services they provide, while continuing
to play a vital role in the wider medicines supply chain.
As community-based medical and nursing care becomes more focused on supporting
people with complex needs, pharmacies will, with growing frequency, be
able to serve as direct healthcare access points for the majority of
the population. To achieve this, pharmacists must be able to enhance
their skills continuously.
The profession must attract individuals not
only with high intelligence and the ability to excel in the pharmaceutical
sciences but also with the experience and personalities required for
the support of appropriate medicines-taking and health-related behaviour
changes.
Once qualified, pharmacists will need access to sophisticated resources
that will help them to go on building the competencies required by fast
changing societies with rising health expectations. Our research indicates
that the UK, thanks to both its hospital-based clinical pharmacy heritage
and strong ministerial direction in relation to community service development,
is well placed to
lead European pharmacy-based healthcare development.
However, this position is to a degree threatened by proposals recently
put forward by the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills.
The DIUS’s suggested new approach to Equivalent and Lower Qualifications
(ELQs) would cut off public funding for students who have already taken
a degree course to study pharmacy at the undergraduate level. It could
similarly reduce qualified individuals’ access to ongoing postgraduate
education.
The reasons for this policy change, which some well placed commentators
believe will significantly threaten the future of valued institutions
such as the Open University and Birkbeck College, are understandable.
The Government wishes to increase the proportion of the workforce with
higher educational qualifications. It therefore plans to divert upwards
of £100m away from supporting people who have already been to university
into the provision of foundation degrees for those who have not yet had
the opportunity to benefit from higher education.
Foundation degrees are intermediate level, work-related qualifications
that may provide the individuals who take them with a starting point
for further studies. The Government also hopes
that employers will move to fund more educational opportunities for graduates
seeking to develop further their knowledge and abilities, so that in
total overall spending on higher education will increase.
Few would doubt that such thinking is well intended. Yet Richard
Lambert,
director-general of the Confederation of British Industry, argued in
December last year that the DIUS’s proposals represent a high risk
experiment. At worst it will shift resources away from tried and tested
educational activities into less productive areas.
Mr Lambert also questioned
the willingness of CBI members to close the higher education funding
gap for existing graduates that the new policy will open. He also argued
that from a national interest perspective it may often be more useful
to help the latter to achieve their full potential, rather than to increase
the number of foundation degree holders.
In pharmacy’s case, the ELQ policy debate has another important
dimension, in that other health professions, such as medicine and nursing,
will be exempted from the proposed changes. Individuals who already have
degrees will still be funded to study the latter, if they chose to do
so. Yet they will not be able to claim public support should they wish
to undertake a pharmacy degree.
This may well deprive pharmacy, which from a national scientific perspective
is arguably a strategically significant area of study, of individuals
who could play an important future part in taking it forward as a healthcare
profession. As they currently stand, the DIUS’s ELQ proposals would
also, after a transitional period, have a significant financial impact
on pharmacy schools and departments that have in the past offered undergraduate
places to students who have already taken initial degrees.
Educational institutions that are only worried about their financial
positions must be prepared to fight for sectional interests alone. We
believe that the ELQ policy issues outlined here raise concerns that
are relevant to the future of pharmacy as a whole, and the ongoing improvement
of the services it can provide to the community.
Hence, we hope that
the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and interested members will investigate
this issue further and, to the extent that they too conclude there
is substantive reason for public concern, be willing to communicate this
to MPs and to ministers and their advisers in as timely a way as possible.
If pharmacy education is not adequately supported, rising public expectations
will not be met.
The House of Commons debated this topic on
8 January 2008.
A
report of the debate
—
EDITOR |
The
Pharmaceutical Journal