Pharmacy Technicians the new Healthcare professionals

[SolomonQ]

end of the day, it comes to how you define a "healthcare professional" and there is no universally accepted definition, and some other professions like doctors even question pharmacy as a profession.

Kemzo points out that some techs are highly educated but some arent, so the group as a whole doesnt have to be highly educated, so IMHO that doesnt qualify this group as a profession, not to be degrading to techs, if alot of people with good degrees (BDS, MBBS, Pharm) start doing jobs such as "garbage collector person" (maybe because theres more money in it), would that then be classified as a profession? In my opinion no, Because the educated must be directly relevant to the profession.

All healthcare professional have roles specific to them, sometimes the roles overlap but there are always some roles that do not and are specific to that healthcare profession, e.g. doctors are experts at diagnosing and treating patients, nurses are experts at caring for patients e.g. wound care, stoma care etc..., pharmacists are experts in drugs, dentists are experts at oral care, opticians are experts in eye care, outside healthcare lawyers are experts at law and crime, accountants are experts at tax and other financial issues......what are pharmacy techs experts at, or what expert knowledge do they have? What is that they can do which I can't as a pharmacist. That is the million dollar question.

however kemzo, I would like to hear a brief outline of the definition of a "healthcare profession" that you are working with.

[Rafael]

end of the day, it comes to how you define a "healthcare professional" and there is no universally accepted definition, and some other professions like doctors even question pharmacy as a profession.

exactly, as part of a module we did write an essay about ' is pharmacy a profession?' and had a debate for 2 hours after submitting the assignment and most agreed that 'pharmacy in a transitional state and the future roles of pharmacists in the new contract will help to push its recognition as aprofession'.

pharmacists are still suffering to be seen as health care professionals and ppl around here are telling me a technician can be seen as professional...... a bit strange and with all due respect to others, it does not make any sense for me.

i quote the following from my own assignment, the DEFINITION of what is a profession:

Theory of Professionalism

Theories of professionalism have been developed and used within the social sciences in 20th century. Until the 1970’s, theorists of professions held a strong interest in distinguishing professions from other occupational groups by comparing the traits of occupational groups.2 the traits theory features of profession are; possessing specialised knowledge and lengthy training, being granted a monopoly of practice, being service oriented and self-regulating itself. The traits approach although highly compatible with functionalism; neither of them has reached a precise definition of the basic traits of a profession.6
From the traits approach of profession, I can tell that pharmacy is on its way for professionalism. To start with, it possesses some qualification of traits theory of professionalism. It has a monopoly of practice encouraging professionals to act for public interest because they are granted a monopoly in that the updated pharmacy acts restrict entry onto the register of pharmacists. In the UK, pharmacists have a monopoly over compounding and dispensing as well as monopoly on the sale of a type of medicine, pharmacy only medicines (1, 2). In addition to that, pharmacists possess knowledge and undergo a lengthy period of training. Training and knowledge include a set of pharmaceutical services in terms of treating minor ailment and providing patients’ advices. The training helps individual pharmacists to acknowledge the values of the profession 2 . Another point that pharmacists have is self-regulation of their own professional through pharmacy conduct and code of ethics, implemented by the RPSGB committees. Their responsibilities usually involve extensive skills and technical knowledge. They determine training requirements, control entry to the profession, and, in some cases, grant the licence to practise.6

[SolomonQ]

high five, Raoul!!

[dizzyb23]

I have the highest respect for the person who works and study's hard, doesn't let a bit of power turn them into mini tyrants and is a great example of a member of their particular profession.....be it doctor, nurse, pharmacist, policeman etc. I consider myself a professional and will always do so......................no matter what my chosen career will be

[SolomonQ]

I consider myself a professional and will always do so......................no matter what my chosen career will be

that is a good way to think, but here you highlight "professional" as a good attitude to work.

Just to push the message home, A profession isn't a job title, it is a concept derived from alot of different ideals, including those highlighted by me in the posts above e.g. expert knowledge and relatively high level of education. Pharmacy isnt the only profession to have assistants, and the funny thing is ACTs spend years to get to that level i.e. from their very first counter assistant course to the final exam, and they train so they can accurately check dispensed Rxs, thats all it is at the end of the day. Now thats not really an expert skill is it?

Pharmacists spend four years at uni learning physical chemistry, pharmacology, physiology, drug formulation, pharmacokinetics etc.... the only accuracy checking related teaching I remember is 2 one hour worksops where basicly we picked up a basked with a Rx and a box of dispensed med with label and we had to check that, and there was no failing or passing this and attendting wasn't even mandatory. so this is how hard checking is considered.

Funny thing is some ACTs do actually consider themselves on a similar level to the pharmacist, just because they can check same as the pharmacist, they dont realise that say if they are checking Rx "a", they would check to see if what was dispensed is actually Simvastation 40mg, but when a pharmacist checks, s/he not only does that but also makes sure the simvastatin doesnt interact with 4 other meds that are already in the bag. Abviously all these extra things are being done in the head and even if a problem is identified, the pharmacist will go talk to the patient or speak to the prescriber and not tell every staff member the exact nature of the problem.

last but not least, "ACTs" reminds me of maccies (McDonald's) star system for staff, basicly they offer plastic gold stars to staff to put on ther name tags who pass certain tests, e.g. hygiene, and customer service. There are five categories and each one has its own star, so a staff member (crew member , lmao) who has passed all five gets to wear five stars and thinks s/he is really someone in the store, but the stars don't really mean anything, yet this "qualification" is international, just as Mc Donalds are. The ACT qualification on the other hand doesnt even carry across the channel never mind the rest of the world, it is only something created to assist the pharmacist in an ever Mcdonalised model of pharmacy.

[kemzero]

that is a good way to think, but here you highlight "professional" as a good attitude to work.

Just to push the message home, A profession isn't a job title, it is a concept derived from alot of different ideals, including those highlighted by me in the posts above e.g. expert knowledge and relatively high level of education. Pharmacy isnt the only profession to have assistants, and the funny thing is ACTs spend years to get to that level i.e. from their very first counter assistant course to the final exam, and they train so they can accurately check dispensed Rxs, thats all it is at the end of the day. Now thats not really an expert skill is it?

Pharmacists spend four years at uni learning physical chemistry, pharmacology, physiology, drug formulation, pharmacokinetics etc.... the only accuracy checking related teaching I remember is 2 one hour worksops where basicly we picked up a basked with a Rx and a box of dispensed med with label and we had to check that, and there was no failing or passing this and attendting wasn't even mandatory. so this is how hard checking is considered.

Funny thing is some ACTs do actually consider themselves on a similar level to the pharmacist, just because they can check same as the pharmacist, they dont realise that say if they are checking Rx "a", they would check to see if what was dispensed is actually Simvastation 40mg, but when a pharmacist checks, s/he not only does that but also makes sure the simvastatin doesnt interact with 4 other meds that are already in the bag. Abviously all these extra things are being done in the head and even if a problem is identified, the pharmacist will go talk to the patient or speak to the prescriber and not tell every staff member the exact nature of the problem.

last but not least, "ACTs" reminds me of maccies (McDonald's) star system for staff, basicly they offer plastic gold stars to staff to put on ther name tags who pass certain tests, e.g. hygiene, and customer service. There are five categories and each one has its own star, so a staff member (crew member , lmao) who has passed all five gets to wear five stars and thinks s/he is really someone in the store, but the stars don't really mean anything, yet this "qualification" is international, just as Mc Donalds are. The ACT qualification on the other hand doesnt even carry across the channel never mind the rest of the world, it is only something created to assist the pharmacist in an ever Mcdonalised model of pharmacy.

Solomon Q...the music maker,what planet do you live on mate ?!
I agree with you that some ACTs believe they are practically p'cists because they perform an accuracy check ...but not the intelligent professional ones?

I think its wrong to equate a Maccie 5x worker to an ACT.
I work with techs who are aware of drug interactions or both technical and non-technical faults on a prescription and we work well together, agreed I initially pointed out some facts to them e.g erythromycin/Simvastatin interactions, stuff around warfarin, glucosamine, St.Johns worts etc. I do agree that ACTs/techs probably would know not to take grapefruit juice with a statin /a CCB but wouldn't know WHY, but perhaps some p'cists wouldn't either.
There are loads of graduates who just cram for exams and re-produce on a exam day..forgetting it all once the exams are over..or aren't there

There are loads of qualified university educated "professionals" who do not practice professionally.

Permit me to say if i may Solomon , I think you are an educational snob....not a bad thing but hey education doesn't always work although i know it'll never let you down.

[SolomonQ]

kemzero, i'm still waiting for your definition of a healthcare professional.

...but regarding what you say, i am not an educational snob, far from it, I might appear to be one because i'm merely pointing out the facts regarding to the criteria to be an actual professional, abviously to prove my point I had to go on about how ACTs can't be regarded as being highly educated.

I agree with you that some ACTs believe they are practically......but not the intelligent professional ones?

and how many of these intelligent ones are there, 90%?50%?20%? I can bet you the answer would be closer to the later than the former.

you talk about ACTs knowing interactions etc.... but let me assure you i've seen alot of normal dispensers who know alot of interactions just like the ones you describe, and they've got to know them through experience, I once had a girl who normally works at the front helping me in the dispensary, all she'd passed was the normal counter assisstant coursem, she came to me enquiring why a Rx said 28 tablets Trimethoprim, one at night, (normally they are 14 tabs 200mg 1bd) abviously that's a a prophylaxis dose for UTIs, and I explained that to her, pinting out the 100mg dose also. Enough said about that but you're going as far as saying a pharmacist woudn't know a simple interaction or know why not to take grapefruit juice with simvastatin
?? , mate, just because you've ended up with really good techs/ACTs doesnt mean they are all like that. I don't mind people having the opinion about ACTs/Techs that you have but you should check where your allegences lie.

[kemzero]

kemzero, i'm still waiting for your definition of a healthcare professional.

...but regarding what you say, i am not an educational snob, far from it, I might appear to be one because i'm merely pointing out the facts regarding to the criteria to be an actual professional, abviously to prove my point I had to go on about how ACTs can't be regarded as being highly educated.



and how many of these intelligent ones are there, 90%?50%?20%? I can bet you the answer would be closer to the later than the former.

you talk about ACTs knowing interactions etc.... but let me assure you i've seen alot of normal dispensers who know alot of interactions just like the ones you describe, and they've got to know them through experience, I once had a girl who normally works at the front helping me in the dispensary, all she'd passed was the normal counter assisstant coursem, she came to me enquiring why a Rx said 28 tablets Trimethoprim, one at night, (normally they are 14 tabs 200mg 1bd) abviously that's a a prophylaxis dose for UTIs, and I explained that to her, pinting out the 100mg dose also. Enough said about that but you're going as far as saying a pharmacist woudn't know a simple interaction or know why not to take grapefruit juice with simvastatin
?? , mate, just because you've ended up with really good techs/ACTs doesnt mean they are all like that. I don't mind people having the opinion about ACTs/Techs that you have but you should check where your allegences lie.

Hi Solomon Q, obviously you are really passionate about being a pharmacist, which is great.
My allegience definitely lies with pharmacists, but I've always been one to call a spade a spade . There could be some pharmacists who know not to take grapefruit juce with simvastatin and not know WHY, nobody knows everything!

[SolomonQ]

but I've always been one to call a spade a spade

you're trying to call a spoon a spade because it can do a similar job to a spade to some extent.

There could be some pharmacists who know not to take grapefruit juce with simvastatin and not know WHY, nobody knows everything!

Some doctor could be prescribing x drug for ABC combination of symptoms, knowing it treats the condition but they might not know what the condition is, but a lay person, moderately educated, might come across the same group of symptoms and decide to research it, (e.g internet, freely available medical textbooks) and get to more about the condition than any GP in their locality, does that make them better then the GP, or in some way earn them the right to be equated with them? i'd say no.


also a further point to ponder, dispensing doctor's dispensing assistants(Normally ACTs).....are they healthcare professionals??....they go through a DDA course more through than the NPA one,meaning they are educated atleast to the same level, they are paid and trusted more. if you worked alongside one, like I have, you'd know they know far more than any community pharmacy ACT and they've not had the luxury of learning off a pharmacist or even a doctor. If you think they are a HCP...then for years they have been deprived of their right to join the BMA, but they don't seem to be kicking up a fuss about it like the community ones...if they are not, then how can community pharmacy ACTs be HCPs?? Just think about it.

[kemzero]

you're trying to call a spoon a spade because it can do a similar job to a spade to some extent.



Some doctor could be prescribing x drug for ABC combination of symptoms, knowing it treats the condition but they might not know what the condition is, but a lay person, moderately educated, might come across the same group of symptoms and decide to research it, (e.g internet, freely available medical textbooks) and get to more about the condition than any GP in their locality, does that make them better then the GP, or in some way earn them the right to be equated with them? i'd say no.


also a further point to ponder, dispensing doctor's dispensing assistants(Normally ACTs).....are they healthcare professionals??....they go through a DDA course more through than the NPA one,meaning they are educated atleast to the same level, they are paid and trusted more. if you worked alongside one, like I have, you'd know they know far more than any community pharmacy ACT and they've not had the luxury of learning off a pharmacist or even a doctor. If you think they are a HCP...then for years they have been deprived of their right to join the BMA, but they don't seem to be kicking up a fuss about it like the community ones...if they are not, then how can community pharmacy ACTs be HCPs?? Just think about it.

I beg to disagree with your view on Dispensing Doctors techs vs Community Pharmacy techs, I have worked with a dispensing doctor tech who knew .......all; it was an absolute nightmare. So I guess techs competencies/education are all relative.

Personally I would like to see a better educational system for all techs (registered), but I doubt whether thatwill ever happen


As for them being professional or not, I will still class them as professionals (not highly skilled/specialised); perhaps the term professional is used too loosely in our society.