Will there be a seamless transition?
From Mr R. Sinclair, MRPharmS
Could the Royal Pharmaceutical Society confirm that the registration examination will continue to be held in June and September in 2009 and 2010, ensuring a seamless transition during the setting up of the General Pharmaceutical Council?
Is there any indication as to what, if any, designatory letters may be required after an individual’s name to indicate one is a suitably registered pharmacist under the new organisation?
Roy Sinclair
New Malden, Surrey
Royal Pharmaceutical Society responds
From Nicola Tyers, head of preregistration, Royal Pharmaceutical Society
It is expected that the registration examination sittings will continue as normal, subject to any changes brought about by the new Section 60 Order or any amendments to the Society’s byelaws. Until we are in receipt of the consultation on the Pharmacy Order 2009 (the new section 60 Order) and the subsequent rules, we are not in a position to provide any further details.
However, we can provide assurance to those due to sit the examination in 2009 that the sittings will be held under the existing rules and byelaws as currently apply. Depending on when in 2010 the General Pharmaceutical Council opens, this may also apply to those due to sit in 2010 as well.
Mr Sinclair’s second question asks what designatory letters may be required to indicate whether a pharmacist is registered. It is unlikely that the GPhC will award postnominal designatory letters; these will be awarded to members of the professional body. The term “pharmacist” is likely to be restricted to those on the GPhC practising register, the Transitional Committee is recommending that membership of the professional body (and hence the use of postnominals) will be wider than this group, including non-practising and retired pharmacists.
Less parrot-fashion learning
From Mr G. Singh, MRPharmS
I have recently joined the Royal Pharmaceutical Society Register following completion of my preregistration training at an independent pharmacy.
I believe there is room for improvement with regard to the final registration examination. For those unaware, the examination consists of three segments: a closed-book section, a mathematics section and an open-book section. They are all multiple-choice questions.
Having spoken to many pharmacists who were successful in the exam, both this year and in previous years, there is a general consensus that the training year helped them develop competence.
But most, like myself, believe that the examination should move away from parrot-fashion learning and perhaps lean towards a more hands-on approach, for example, role-play scenarios.
I think adopting this approach could produce more confident pharmacists who, in turn, may provide better healthcare for the general public.
Gurjinder Singh
Birmingham
Royal Pharmaceutical Society responds
From Nicola Tyers, head of preregistration, Royal Pharmaceutical Society
First, I should like to welcome Mr Singh to the Society. On assessing applications to the Register, the regulator must be assured that those joining meet the standards of registration. Currently, this is achieved through meeting standards in two areas:
1. Performance in practice (doing)
2. The testing of knowledge and its application
The published standards are the performance standards and the registration examination syllabus respectively. Either set of standards alone would not be sufficient.
However, the combination of the two provides the evidence that the applicant not only knows facts and how to apply them but also uses everything that he or she has learnt in the MPharm and preregistration year, and routinely performs to the required standard in practice.
To avoid rote learning, questions in the registration examination are written specifically to test the use of knowledge rather than just its acquisition. This is undertaken through questions that apply to practice in a range of scenarios.
Currently, the Society is undertaking a root and branch review of pharmacy education policy. This provides an opportunity to take a holistic approach to education across the pharmacy team and across the careers of individual pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.
The programme will focus on different aspects of the education process for both pharmacists and technicians, including reviewing education standards and quality assurance systems.
It is essential that any new standards reflect practice and will cultivate confident pharmacists who are fit for purpose, ensuring patient safety and providing healthcare for all.
Holistic approach to pharmacy education
From Dr P. H. Rivers, MRPharmS, and others
Stuart Anderson’s refreshingly perceptive and forward-looking Broad spectrum article (PJ, 8 November 2008, p534) raises uncomfortable questions about whether pharmacists will be providing pharmaceutical services in 20 to 30 years’ time.
With pharmacists being actively encouraged to adopt a patient-focus rather than product-focus, and with pharmacy technicians poised in the wings, a plausible argument is made that the Government may no longer need pharmacists.
This scary scenario raises questions about the future of pharmaceutical education and continuing professional development. The time is right to take a more holistic approach to education across the pharmacy team as indicated by the Royal Pharmaceutical Society’s root and branch review of pharmacy education policy mentioned in Nicola Tyers’s response (see above) to “Less parrot-fashion learning” (PJ, 8 November 2008, p536).
If a patient-centred approach is more firmly grounded within the undergraduate and preregistration curriculum, there would be an opportunity for postgraduate diplomas to further develop the critical thinking skills needed to support leadership roles.There would also be less emphasis on filling the gap between pharmacological theory and the application of this knowledge in a clinical context.
Let us imagine what the ideal world of pharmacy practice might look like in the year 2040. Community and primary care trust practice pharmacists will be instrumental in reducing health inequality by offering services, such as vascular risk assessments, weight management, smoking cessation and sexual health services, and will be prescribing within their defined areas of competence.
Hospital pharmacists will be integral to prescribing and therapeutic decision-making and will be major strategic players in medicines safety and clinical governance.
As Mr Anderson intimates, if pharmacy technicians were to take responsibility for the procurement, storage and dispensing of medicines, this could facilitate the transition for more pharmacists to take on clinical roles.
At the University of Derby, we look forward to providing an academic environment that reflects the direction of these cultural changes. Our programme for clinical pharmacy technicians will continue to evolve in a manner that takes into account their expanding role.
For example, we are hosting a conference in July 2009 with the theme “The future of the pharmacy technician”. Our postgraduate pharmacy and non-medical prescribing programmes, supported by interdisciplinary teaching, will focus on the development of skills worthy of the reflective practitioner and will nurture critical thinking and appraisal.
The emerging practitioner should be equipped to question, adapt and apply his or her knowledge and skills in order to make a real difference to service users.
We hope that the forthcoming review of pharmacy education policy by the Society will be inclusive of all members of the pharmacy family and appreciative of an interdisciplinary approach to the provision of a personalised, quality conscious and patient-focused NHS.
Peter Rivers
Sarah Burd
Sarah Deeming
Geoff Glover
Ceinwen Mannall
Helen Martin
Julie Reynolds
Robert Weglicki
Pharmacy Academic Practice Unit
University of Derby