Quality of Dispensing Assistants

[DavidS]

Although I prefer the informal atmosphere of working in independants, I must say that I have spent 2 days working in a large busy B###s and the staff only made one trivial dispensing error (ensure plus instead of with fibre).

That is unlike my experience in independents, where I usually expect to spot five or six a day, many of which are "heritage" repeat labelling errors, meaning that no-one spotted them last month, and maybe longer ago than that.

I think a lot of it is due to the personal relationship that is built up in independents, which I find lacking in most multiples nowadays. In independents people are more likely to "carry" their friends in spite of their known incompetance, perhaps. It does seem like most of those five or six mistakes emanate from one member of the team, wherever I am.

Comments?

[Jeff]

I think a lot of it is due to the personal relationship that is built up in independents, which I find lacking in most multiples nowadays. In independents people are more likely to "carry" their friends in spite of their known incompetance, perhaps. It does seem like most of those five or six mistakes emanate from one member of the team, wherever I am.

Comments?

Yes. By accepting peoples weaknesses we are able to retain their strengths.
A "known incompetence" is one that it is fairly easy to work around.

Jeff

[DavidS]

Yes. By accepting peoples weaknesses we are able to retain their strengths.
A "known incompetence" is one that it is fairly easy to work around.

Jeff

Mmm. Nice in theory, dangerous in practice, surely. But you are right. And in the worst cases I don't take bookings on the days when the most dangerous assistants are working. Although that doesn't stop them filling boxes with out of date cuttings of the wrong strengths, etc.

[lamzee]

Yes but at the end of the day we are qualified and they are shop staff who more than likely left school at 16 with 4 GCSEs

I think we expect too much of them, to be honest.

[Fleegle]

I totally agree, which brings me to wonder about the "remote supervision" issue. Personally, I would have serious problems with allowing some of the dispensing staff I have come across over the years free rein to run the dispensary in my proposed absence. I often feel uncomfortable if I leave the pharmacy for two minutes, let alone two hours.

[jaymags]

As a dispenser myself I am very conscientious about my job and try hard not make dispensing errors. This week I managed to make only three, one of those was because I was feeling unwell (migraine) and was labelling as well as dispensing. Our pharmacist made one. I have no other excuses for the other two, which incidentally would not have been fatal errors.
This does not make me feel any better about the errors I made.
We have implimented an error list for all staff, and the pharmacist., so that we can reduce the errors we make and find out where the main errors are been made (wrong strength, quantity etc etc)
This having been in practice for a week now has helped me to be far more more vigilant of what I am doing. Working for an independant for the past 11 years and been qualified (only to the minimum) for the past three I have seen many changes in the way we dispense and on top of that the increased work load is not reflected in the pay.
I only got 3 "O" Levels and one of them was not maths (I got an uncalssified for that) but is has not dwindled my capacity for learning.
I am not defending dispensers or moaning about pay but in this economic climate it is hard to concentrate on what should be most important, not making mistakes.

[Fleegle]

Well I suppose this sort of justifies my point... Four dispensing errors a week are four too many..Your first mistake could well be your last in this game. I would be unhappy to be held responsible for any errors made in my absence, recession or not. I would, however, accept responsibility for any errors had I been present in the dispensary when they were made. Regarding pay, this issue is purely between yourself and your employer.

Purely my opinion.

Fleeg.

[Pharmanaut]

Did the errors get past the "final check" and actually get handed to a patient?

[DavidS]

As a dispenser myself

Look, Jaymags. I'm not knocking dispensing assistants here - where would we be without you. I've often wondered how on earth you cope with the jobs that you do on the pay that youu get. It must be the status!

What this is about is the responsibility. Some of your colleagues do not feel any sense of responsibility for their own self-improvement, or for the errors they make.

The same is also true of some pharmacists, but the difference is that I will not be held responsible for the mistakes of another pharmacist (in theory, although actually it has been tried, but that's another story), yet I am held responsible for the mistakes of technicians and other staff. I have had staff give stuff out without it being checked, not relay to the patient what I have asked to be relayed, and interactions that the computer has flagged up suppressed without being told.

Soon, it is proposed, and as Fleegle says, I will be held responsible for mistakes that happen when I am not even in the pharmacy. This is just not acceptable. And yet, despite my mentioning it on this forum once before, there has been no suggestion in high places that either there be a concurrent move to create the post of The Responsible Technician with their own insurance, etc., who would take responsibility when the RP is absent, or even that the pharmacist's criminal liability for dispensing (etc) errors made and given out when the RP is absent be modified.

I'm afraid that I think the best solution for us locums may be to give up our self-employed status, but I'd like other's views on that. Perhaps in another part of this forum. Infact, I'll sort that now.

Until the responsible technician becomes a reality, the Conscientious Technician is very much valued and respected.

[jaymags]

Did the errors get past the "final check" and actually get handed to a patient?

Most certainly not. One of them I picked up myself before it got to the pharmacist.