Mds

[naf123]

Is it a requirement for care homes to have blister packing systems or is it just the "fashion" to have MDS systems because its "safer"? (never quite understood why it is safer - they have MARS sheets anyway and mark down what they give or not!)

[tinx25388]

My manager, who often vists care homes for potential business, has found CQC have been recommending it when they have been visiting the homes, however I dont believe that it is actually a requirement.

[Merlyn]

There's no evidence that it's actually safer, but it makes a lot easier to check against the MAR sheets whether medication has at least been taken out of the box! That was, at least in my day, CQC's rationale.

Trouble is, this country is quite happy to give enormous sums to bankers for wrecking the economy but very little to people who actually care about and for, others!

[johnep]

My understanding was that MDS saved the home employing qualified staff to hand out medicines.
johnep

[hibernia]

The homes can use unqualified staff to administer meds, which is and always has been a nursing role. Instead of them paying a professional nurse a pharmacist does work for nothing. A person who works for no reward is often called an amateur.

[Merlyn]

No legal reason why anyone can't hand out meds. Most Care Homes have never employed nurses; even, when there were such things, Nursing Homes didn't lways use qualified people to administer meds.

And professionals often work "pro bono". Legal term for working for nothing if it's in the public good. Not saying this is!

Many years ago I was told that the big mistake Aussie pharmacists made was to give MDS to Homes. They weren't used in UK at the time. "Don't" the speaker (who imported the things into Oz) begged me, "make the same mistake!" What happened? Boots, in particular did. They saw it as a way of locking in the care homes business.

[naf123]

If all pharmacists and businesses - including boots got together and signed a pact - to charge at least £5 per patient per month for a care home blister pack and refuse to charge less (they can charge more if they want - but risk loosing business to other pharmacies that may charge the minimum £5.)

The problem is enforcing it - boots will give them loyalty points etc to gain business. But if everyone had some common sense - and forced a minimum £5 charge per patient per month - the care home business will give some of their profits to the pharmacy sector!

Now who has the ability to promote such action? It would bring millions of pounds into the pharmacy sector. And its SO easy to start - just whip out a legal agreement between all the big chains and all independent pharmacies and within a few months the care homes will get a letter saying to pay up or see their meds in regular packs.

Such action is the only thing that can save the pharmacy sector from going under and giving it much respect. Let the Daily mail wail and moan - we are NOT refusing to provide medicines - we will give medicines no problems! Its just the luxury of blister packing will be charged. I don't think pharmacists will loose respect in the public eye because of this.

[Merlyn]

naf123, IIRC you risk prosecution for even suuggesting such a (legally) anti-competive cartel.

[naf123]

naf123, IIRC you risk prosecution for even suuggesting such a (legally) anti-competive cartel.

Wow! I did not realise. Thanks for the legal advice. Should I take down my suggestion on this website too?

I can see how it can be anti-competitive but then its a bit like airlines offering fuel for free! They have fuel surcharges. Is that anti-competitive? Its like all the websites charging for delivery. Is that anti-competitive?

At the moment pharmacies are supplying blister packs for free at a great cost to themselves. Agreeing a fee per patient per month to COVER COSTS can't be anti competitive. Just preventing us from making a loss. Maybe my £5 suggestion is too high. Maybe it should be £1 per month. That is subject to debate and calculations to what the true cost of blister pack to pharmacies.

In fact giving blister pack away for free is anti-competitive! Your making other pharmacies lose money too! So by setting a price to cover our costs will set the field balanced again. We don't need to make more money out of it but just to cover our costs.

I welcome your views...

[Merlyn]

LOL! I wouldn't worry too much! I suspect there has to a reasonable likelihood of someone actualy trying to do whatever it is being suggested. Think the two guys who went down encouraging rioting on Facebook. The anti-competiitive bit is the encouragement to positive agreement to do whatever. It's perfectly OK to do it yourself.

In my experience (and I have a great deal of experience in this field although it's a bit out of date now) some pharmacists do make a charge, but add value by making a meaningful effort to engage with the Home Manager or owner.