Chemists 'to offer GP services'

[mrmeshi]

Saw this under as a Headline on BBC News today

BBC NEWS | Health | Chemists 'to offer GP services'

what do you guys think to this, is it good for community pharmacists or is it increasing the work load too much?

[johnep]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

This is APMS as advocated by 'upstart'. Assura doing already.
johnep

[mrmeshi]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

im applying for pharmacy this year and so i have no idea what a APMS is? could you explain?

[SolomonQ]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

articles merely about introducing MAS in England, but its already been in place in Scotland for some time. and basicly if anyone benefits its the public primarily and secondly the pharmacy, and also the GPs who will have reduced workload without reduction in payments etc... but it will just increase of work for pharmacist who on the whole will not be adequatly be compensated for this extra workload. They will still do the same amount of dispensing, plus the burden of MURs and other essential/enhanced service burden plus this MAS scheme. I bet the PCT will also pay next to nothing for this service by taking money out of purchase profits etc...

who wins.....not the pharmacist

[N.T]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

im applying for pharmacy this year and so i have no idea what a APMS is? could you explain?

Don't worry. I've BEEN a pharmacist for 3 years and I've no idea what that acronym starts for.

[johnep]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

Alternative Provider of Medical Services.
johnep

[Pharmanaut]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

articles merely about introducing MAS in England, but its already been in place in Scotland for some time. and basicly if anyone benefits its the public primarily and secondly the pharmacy, and also the GPs who will have reduced workload without reduction in payments etc... but it will just increase of work for pharmacist who on the whole will not be adequatly be compensated for this extra workload. They will still do the same amount of dispensing, plus the burden of MURs and other essential/enhanced service burden plus this MAS scheme. I bet the PCT will also pay next to nothing for this service by taking money out of purchase profits etc...

who wins.....not the pharmacist

Figuring out what can be supplied can be a nightmare if what is allowed on it is decided by the individual PCT. Our PMR suppliers will not be able to support the formularies. Also if it is PCT based, is it the PCT where you live or the one that the pharmacy is in that applies?

[Tony Schofield]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

articles merely about introducing MAS in England, but its already been in place in Scotland for some time. and basicly if anyone benefits its the public primarily and secondly the pharmacy, and also the GPs who will have reduced workload without reduction in payments etc... but it will just increase of work for pharmacist who on the whole will not be adequatly be compensated for this extra workload. They will still do the same amount of dispensing, plus the burden of MURs and other essential/enhanced service burden plus this MAS scheme. I bet the PCT will also pay next to nothing for this service by taking money out of purchase profits etc...

who wins.....not the pharmacist

I don't follow any of your arguments. Would you be kind enough to elaborate please?

There are minor ailment schemes, we have one locally. We are paid to do it and everyone including doctors patients and pharmacy regard it as a good thing. The problem is that not everywhere has one unlike Scotland. Now they will.

MURs are not a burden they are a damned well remunerated service. I don't know any GP services that pay as much for so little. The argument is how much an employee pharmacist should be paid for doing them and pressure by proprietors on employees to achieve targets. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the government which is paying out good money for a service pharmacists whinge about having to do whilst in the same breath telling anyone who will listen that no-one considers pharmacy as a provider of health services.

PCTs do not take anything out of purchase profits. Money is devolved to PCTs to pay for pharmacy services but PCTs don't take anything from us.

The problem is that to get paid for the services outlined in the white paper money will have to be negotiated from PCT budgets. However, PCTs have to achieve targets on access and choice and although GPs control large chunks of cash through Practice Based Commissioning there is a political will to place it elsewhere. Pharmacy is well placed to provide such services and the White Paper indicates it may be a reality.

Pharmacy is winning. The problem is that too many pharmacists are demotivated to take on the clinical roles they could and should be taking on. Citing dispensing workload and rejecting/vilifying attempts to help them such as the "responsible pharmacist" concept is not the way to impress commissioners of services.

As a pharmacy student you would do well to recognise that you are entering the profession at the most exciting time in it's existence. Don't believe all the bullshit posted by negative old reactionaries but keep an open mind, be prepared to embrace and manage change and you also will be one of the winners.

[Tony Schofield]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

Alternative Provider of Medical Services.
johnep

YES INDEED!! The real opportunity for pharmacists in the new age. Provide medical services but employ a doctor only for the bits that need a doctor. Employ nurse practitioners and pharmacists and run the enterprise efficiently. Salaried GPs earn £60k. GP principals in a well run practice with average list size achieving all QOF targets earn about £110k.

There is a lot to be made for those with the confidence (and let's face it there are many amongst us who claim they can do this!) to take on such an enterprise. All income including dispensing income to be divided amongst the shareholders?

[mrmeshi]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

I dont see how it can be a bad thing. When someone asked on the student section whether or not they should persue a career in pharmacy everyone jumped up and said not to do it because its 'boring', which got me a bid worries because i had already sent my UCAS application off. But when i read this article on BBC the other day i jumped up in joy because it sounded like the job would be more involving with the patient, especially when you couple this with independant and supplementary prescribing i think the career is taking a turn for the best, yet most people who have replied to this thread are so pesimistic, why are you not confident with change that will make your jobs more involving and proactive?

[Tony Schofield]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

WELL SAID Mr Meshi.

With your attitude you will do well. Remember you will be competing against those with negative attitudes when you qualify.

That should make you feel confident!!

[Zoggite]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

Mr Meshi,
I have been a Pharmacist since 1992 and I promise you that this is not a boring job!

[Jeff]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

why are you not confident with change that will make your jobs more involving and proactive?

Because the job is already as involved and pro-active as I wish to make it.
There are patients being managed by my team more effectively than can be done by the surgery (and OK I'll be the first to admit that the management is not ideal - but it's the best we can offer at this stage - but 6 months in and only locumming there two days a week - I see it as significant progress - both for the team and the patients)
Less than ideal because the process is opportunistic, not authorised by care plans, protocols or patient group directives, and not expressly funded - it's just a practical attempt at a solution to particular patients problems.

The next steps will be to draw up the protocols for what is already in place (without denying the opportunistic).

Funding - I'm a locum - it's not my problem ;-)

As for minor ailment schemes - the ability to give away what I can already sell is not a major advance that inspires me.

As for prescribing - unless you are planning to retire soon - go for it.

Me - I think I retired years ago - pharmacy remains as a hobby (out of a respect for the staff and patients and occasionally the owners) and as a tax limitation exercise.

Jeff

[the old merlin]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

As one who is on the very brink of retirement I think that while pharmacy, like anything else, has always been what you made it, the last few years have been a really exciting time for pharmacy and, as Tony makes clear, the next few will be even better.

I looked in the sits vac in the PJ last week, and was really envious at the options available to the young men & women starting now compared to 40-50 years ago. Hospital then was poorly paid and pretty well restricted to dispensary work. Community (retail) was better in that one had a wide range of products to sell, and could always "make up a bottle" but relationships with GP's could be even worse than they can be now!
There were opportunities in industry, but by no means what there appear to be now.

[pharout]

Re: Chemists 'to offer GP services'

I agree with what many of you say. Here in the U.S., we've went through the same transformation. The difference here is that you have state medical boards deciding the scope of practice for pharmacy in that state. Some states pharmacists do more than others. For the most part, pharmacy has moved forward in terms of clinical involvement in disease state management and prevention. Community pharmacy does this to some extent, but problems still exist because: they do not know the physicians they work with, they do not have access to lab information, a patient's comorbidities, previous med trials, etc. This has traditionally favored those who practice in a variety of institutions here (as I do). I think you are in a key turning point based on this article. I would embrace it, especially from the community pharmacy perspective as it will vary your role and hopefully be more rewarding in terms of career. You have a national medical board on your side and that is, many times, the key hurdle. This will open a door to many opportunities in the future and change the role for those who wish to embark on this change. Believe me, this is exactly the position you want to be in as a profession !!!