Are pharmacy services the holygrail

[cadbury-king]

Lets be honest pharmacists have always known of the frightening and real possibility that a robot can come in and do what we do.i.e matching box with appropriate patient with little error in a process called DISPENSING.

I know they are people who are opposed to the liberating the NHS policies. But i think that the delivery of pharmacuetical care services will save pharmacists...


As i said a robot could do what we do, but what a robot cant do is advice and council i.e provide services



Dispensing is finished......pharmacy is shifting from the industrial age, that is working in dispesnsing factories and forfilling orders(prescription) to a service driven industry



So the question is....Should i absolutely start becoming accredited for as many possible services under the sun




PS my question is talking about community pharmacy of course

[vanquish s]

I would suggest you do as this is the way pharmacy is moving. Dispensing will still be vital. Its true a robot can replace this role, but 50years time whats to say robots wont replace humans all together. The invention of AI is drawing very close. The movie I robot is a real possibility in my opinion. Sorry I know thats slightly off topic

[Tony Schofield]

So the question is....Should i absolutely start becoming accredited for as many possible services under the sun




PS my question is talking about community pharmacy of course

Absolutely and add in a clinical skills course as well as prescribing.

[bobbin]

Are pharmacy services the holy grail?

Not if they are of the type which can readily be performed by the healthcare assistant at the surgery next door eg. smoking cessation.

I'm sick of hearing about 'services' to be honest. Most of what you read in the PJ and C+D is hot air or BS.

[hibernia]

Not if they are of the type which can readily be performed by the healthcare assistant at the surgery next door eg. smoking cessation.

I'm sick of hearing about 'services' to be honest. Most of what you read in the PJ and C+D is hot air or BS.

+1

The only service worth getting accredited for is one that somebody, either the patient or the state, is willing to put their hand in their pocket and pay for at a realistic rate. Everybody wants 'services' when they come free, but it is a different story when you ask for cash.

Only thing I find people happy to pay for is EHC.
Even for smoking cessation which will save the patient a packet they want somebody else to pay.

[culchie82]

Funny enough I had this conversation with a friend and Pharmacist who also thought this talk of services is just hot air. The GPs already devolved some of their prescribing rights when Independent and Supplementary Prescribers came into being. Are they really going to give more responsibility to Pharmacists and hence diminish their own roles in the eyes of the public? Not a chance.

[Raju]

In the last week, I had a doctor prescribe Sulfadiazine 2gm daily instead of Sulfasalazine, Clopixol accuphase instead of depot, and several less serious errors involving wrong doses of anti-diabetic drugs and subtherapeutic dosese of an anti-fungal drug for scalp ringworm. I don't think a robot could detect these errors.

I do agree that automation is going to mean that pharmacists will have to prove their worth more vigorously - however I think that the professional input of pharmacists at the point of handover of medicines is quite important, and also the fact that GPs as Generalist prescribers often are called on to prescribe meds that they have little or no knowledge of, and the vigilance of pharmacists can prevent serious harm or fatalities. This should be enough to give a reason for the continued need for pharmacists - but we and our rubbish "representatives" do not trumpet the point loudly enough.

I think that community pharmacists should build more professional input into the dispensing process itself rather than focus excessively on separate services which as not integrated enough into patient care pathways. We also should be incentivised to do this. E.g, if pharmacists query and make an effort to query and intervene in all unusual prescribing (and even if no changes are needed - at least to document the query), it would probably hugely improve the quality of meds that patients get.

Right now, there is very limited incentive to do things like this. We can the same dispensing fee regardless. Hence many pharmacists under the burden of an already large workload will turn a blind all to all but very serious prescribing issues. If we have incentives to actively question and reduce questionable prescribing practices, more pharmacists would be do it.

But ultimately, the future of pharmacists is best secured through having an independent prescribing qualification. Any pharmacist who gets such a qualification will (in my opinion) be guaranteed a bright future (I'm putting together my application for such a course this week - I just managed to get a doctor to agree to be the DMP).

[Tony Schofield]

Funny enough I had this conversation with a friend and Pharmacist who also thought this talk of services is just hot air. The GPs already devolved some of their prescribing rights when Independent and Supplementary Prescribers came into being. Are they really going to give more responsibility to Pharmacists and hence diminish their own roles in the eyes of the public? Not a chance.

Doctors had nothing to do with devolving prescribing rights. It was the Crown report that suggested increasing the range of prescribers to improve patient's access to medicines. Doctors were quick to see the opportunities and many happily mentor non medical prescribers. It is not about diminishing their own role in the eye of the public, it is about getting "more bang for the buck" and the credit that goes with it when alternative, cost effective services are developed/commissioned.

I seem to cross swords with you quite a bit on this but I say again, I have been involved in commissioning services for a PCT, I am a prescriber and I succeeded in getting commissioned to provide a service (drug and alcohol treatment) as a director of a social enterprise (with 2 GPs as co-directors) which employed 3 GPs as well as pharmacists. I am not bragging, just saying I know how it works and, whilst it isn't easy, it can be done. First off though you need to be proud you are a pharmacist, aware of your specialist skills and comfortable amongst other professionasl as an autonomous equal (which each one of you is). The most important aspect is to be confident and know the limits of your competence. The opportunities are coming so be ready for them. That doesn't mean wait for Lloyds to recruit!

I will not argue this into oblivion, everyone can read the "No Respect" thread if they want more information.

[culchie82]

You are a prescriber that's good, how many other Pharmacists are Independent or Supplemenntary Prescribers, I bet it's a tiny percentage. Personally I don't know a single Pharmacist who's either. I remember in the latter stages of University, IP and SPs were talked about as exciting new roles for Pharmacists to set the world alight. To say it never took off would be the understatement of the century.

I think Tony you're trying to convince yourself and others that we have some exciting role to play in this new clinical utopia of yours. It's essentially a survival mechanism, rummaging round for some obscure clinical role because you fear the supply function will become defunct and worthless. I didn't train at University to take BPs and cholesterol levels, tasks that can be perfectly performed by any Nurse at any Health centre. If you want to perform these tasks then thats fine, just don't expect to get paid for them because the countries BUST! Also don't expect me to fit them in or around the 400 items I have to check, with the same staffing levels.

I believe Doctors hold all the power and always have. They see their power being erroded/ downgraded in any way they'll hold they kick up a fuss so big it will be making news in Samoa. You may see Pharmacists taking on some minor, bit part roles but nothing to the extent you would have you believe.

Like yourself I will not argue this for eternity, just to say these exciting times never EVER materialise as far as Pharmacy is concerned.

[Raju]

I didn't train at University to take BPs and cholesterol levels, tasks that can be perfectly performed by any Nurse at any Health centre. If you want to perform these tasks then thats fine, just don't expect to get paid for them because the countries BUST! Also don't expect me to fit them in or around the 400 items I have to check, with the same staffing levels..

There are and willl be many roles that do not involve doing stuff that nurses traditionally do. And I agree that we didn't study to do BP checks etc, but we did train to have an input in tweaking and improving the wy meds are used, in identifying problems with polypharmacy that would usually be missed by other healthcare professionals, and in what to consider when choosing drugs that would be appropriate for particular patients. We do have something new to bring to the table that other healthcare professionals cannot do as well as us.