Group items tagged

The General Pharmaceutical Council is appointing a new Chief Pharmacy Officer to strengthen the professional voice within the senior leadership team. This introduction is aimed at fostering a culture of enterprise leadership, inclusion and collaboration within the organisation, GPhC said in a statement. According to GPhC, the Chief Pharmacy Officer will serve as the authoritative representative of the pharmacy regulator in public, within the pharmacy professions, and increasingly in multi-disciplinary teams and collaborative regulatory work. "They will act as the executive lead on pharmacy inspection and regulatory insight, providing professional leadership within the GPhC and collaborating closely with pharmacist and pharmacy technician colleagues across the organisation." The Chief Pharmacy Officer, reporting to the Chief Executive and Registrar, will hold the highest professional position within the GPhC executive, providing pharmacy leadership across the organisation, GPhC said.

Out of the 2,805 students who sat for the common registration assessment test for pharmacists this June, approximately 2,150 have passed the exam, according to the General Pharmaceutical Council. It assesses pharmacy graduates' knowledge and skills to ensure safe and effective practice as pharmacists. This year, the pass rate was 77 per cent, slightly lower than the 80 per cent pass rate in June 2022, where 2,147 out of 2,697 candidates cleared the assessment, GPhC data showed. The exam comprises a written assessment testing pharmaceutical science and pharmacy practice knowledge and a practical assessment evaluating clinical skills and patient-facing competencies. Eligible candidates must complete an accredited pharmacy degree program and meet GPhC requirements. The assessment is conducted jointly by the General Pharmaceutical Council and the Pharmaceutical Society of Northern Ireland. "The assessment is a primary method for testing trainees' ability to apply knowledge and make professional judgments in pharmacy practice," said Mark Voce, Director of Education and Standards, GPhC. "This is crucial in assuring patients and the public that they are in safe hands."

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) today decided to convene a new group, involving all the key stakeholders, focused on assurance of practice post-registration. The decision in today's (9 December) council meeting follows the recommendation of a working group chaired by council member and pharmacist Aamer Safdar on the role of the regulator in post-registration education and training. The new group will be tasked with articulating a set of guiding principles where patient safety is the overarching priority, after carrying out a horizon scanning exercise to pull together an understanding of the system wide approach currently in place. The working group noted that the wider approach, in relation to regulation of post-registration practice and not simply education and training, may require the GPhC reviewing and developing its own control measures, and involving patients and the public in the next stages of work. Reviewing the work on online pharmacy services, the council meeting supported the regulator's plans to continue to require pharmacy websites to be arranged so that a person cannot choose a prescription only medicine and its quantity before there has been an appropriate consultation with a prescriber.

In response to stakeholder feedback, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) is developing a streamlined, single route to registration that will replace the current multiple-pathway system for overseas pharmacists wishing to practice in Great Britain. This revised approach will include updated standards for the education and training of internationally qualified pharmacists, with all applicants still required to pass a registration assessment. The GPhC's Council intends to streamline the registration pathway, reducing the two-year process to one-year process. This new pathway will encompass both university study and in-practice training. Historically, pharmacists qualified within the European Economic Area (EEA) or European Free Trade Association (EFTA) have been eligible for qualification recognition in Great Britain. While this recognition has been extended until September 2028, the future requirement for EEA-qualified pharmacists to undergo the new registration route remains contingent on forthcoming government decisions. Initially, the GPhC had explored the development of three distinct registration routes for internationally-qualified pharmacists, "however decided to change this proposed approach after considering feedback from stakeholders."

Pharmacists with 'relevant experience in a pharmacy setting' can enroll for accredited independent prescribing course, as the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has decided to scrap the requirement of spending at least two years on the register and having previous experience in a specified clinical or therapeutic area before enrolling for the course. The GPhC Council meeting held on Thursday instead proposed that applicants must have "relevant experience in a pharmacy setting and be able to recognise, understand and articulate the skills and attributes required by a prescriber." This experience and awareness will act as the basis of their prescribing practice whilst training. The regulator noted that the majority of stakeholder organisations, including the Chief Pharmaceutical Officers, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society and the statutory education bodies, were in favour of removing the requirement in a consultation on the topic. They highlighted that a specific two-year period was not in itself a robust indication of whether an individual was ready to become a prescriber. They also highlighted that the rapidly developing roles in the profession meant more pharmacists were likely to gain the necessary experience more quickly than in the past. A smaller number of organisations and a larger minority of individuals were opposed, citing that a specific two-year period gave pharmacists the time they needed to develop experience and confidence before being ready to enrol on a course.

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has announced plans to update the pharmacy inspection process by adopting a more targeted and flexible approach. The GPhC inspects registered pharmacies in Great Britain to ensure they meet required standards, assuring patients and the public of safe, effective care. During its Council meeting today (12), the pharmacy regulator outlined plans to improve its inspection approach, including the introduction of shorter, more focused inspections alongside the existing full inspections, to increase efficiency and enable more inspection activity. Inspectors can switch to a full inspection if they believe it is necessary or beneficial. Pharmacies being inspected for the first time will automatically undergo a full inspection. In addition to focused and full inspections, other types, such as re-inspections, intelligence-led inspections, and themed inspections, will also continue.

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) is inviting pharmacy technicians and pharmacists who have undergone revalidation since October 2022 to share their experiences by participating in a survey. Additionally, pharmacy professionals are encouraged to provide feedback on the impact of revalidation and offer comments and suggestions for improving the process. The Council said: "The purpose of this survey is to ensure that the current revalidation process is effective and meets the needs of professionals and the public." To support this review, the GPhC has appointed the consultancy firm Grant Thornton, which will also help in identifying any gaps and determining areas that may require further development. "The Grant Thornton review will contribute to the development of potential changes to the revalidation framework," it said.

Blackwells Chemist, a community pharmacy in South East London did not meet all the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) standards. The pharmacy was inspected on Thursday (01 June) and it was found it did not keep all its records up to date and accurate, particularly its responsible pharmacist records. Investigation report stated that the principle of Governance and principle of Services, including medicines management was 'not met at all'. Under the principle Governance, the report stated: "The pharmacy generally manages the risks associated with its services adequately. People using the pharmacy can provide feedback or raise concerns. And staff generally protect people's personal information well. Team members know what to do to help protect the welfare of a vulnerable person. The pharmacy has written procedures, but these are not easily accessible to team members to refer to. And they are not regularly updated. So, they may be less useful to staff, and may not reflect current best practice." In the inspection it was found that the pharmacy does not always store its medicines properly. It cannot show that it stores all its medicines requiring cold storage at the appropriate temperatures.

In a recent minute of meeting, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) explored the implications of its unique authority under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), granting powers for covert surveillance. Although never utilized, the GPhC is obligated to maintain appropriate policies for such actions. During a recent meeting, the pharmacy regulator discussed that the use of RIPA be brought to a future Council workshop to discuss issues including the "ethical implications of having and using the powers, the possible use of RIPA in online pharmacy investigations and retaining the powers to deal with future scenarios as yet unknown". Led by Chief Executive and Registrar, Duncan Rudkin, the discussion underscored the importance of having robust oversight mechanisms in place. The inspection report provided assurance that the GPhC's policies align with regulatory requirements.

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has developed new draft Standards for Chief Pharmacists to strengthen pharmacy governance. It has set out the professional responsibilities as well as described the knowledge, conduct, and performance required by a chief pharmacist (or equivalent) to support their organisation and its staff to deliver "safe and effective" pharmacy services. The pharmacy regulator has also launched a consultation to find out what patients, carers, and members of the public think about the new draft standards. Participants can share their views "if there are any settings in which the standards could not be applied or met and any positive or negative impacts of the proposals," it said. The survey will open for 12 weeks, from 23 January to 16 April 2024.

In a surprising move that has divided the pharmacy profession, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has sanctioned hundreds of pharmacies to allow patients to self-select certain Pharmacy (P) medicines, a decision met with strong opposition from the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) as well as from the Pharmacy Defense Association (PDA). In a statement, RPS shared that at a board meeting held on 19th June, they expressed "disappointment" over what they described as a lack of prior consultation and comprehensive communication from the GPhC regarding the implications of this policy shift. They argue that allowing patients to self-select certain P medicines could potentially jeopardize established professional guidelines and compromise the role of pharmacists in ensuring safe medication use. "Enabled by the General Pharmaceutical Council, we understand that hundreds of pharmacies, from large multiples to small independents, have been approved by the regulator to enable patients to self-select certain P medicines," the statement said.

The professional leadership body for pharmacists has urged the General Pharmaceutical Council's (GPhC) to make it mandatory to have a chief pharmacist within organisations to ensure transparency for patients, the public and pharmacy staff. On 23 January, the GPhC launched a consultation seeking views on the new draft Standards for Chief Pharmacists it has developed to strengthen pharmacy governance. These standards outlined the professional responsibilities and qualifications required by a chief pharmacist to support their organisation and its staff to deliver "safe and effective" pharmacy services. The pharmacy regulator highlighted the importance of having a registered chief pharmacist meeting these standards in hospitals (or relevant settings) to benefit from the new legislation regarding accidental errors. In response to the consultation, the RPS expressed that while meeting these standards could enhance pharmacy governance, they may not provide the framework needed to fully support staff in reporting and learning from errors.

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has announced that the new requirement for independent prescribing courses will be applicable from 1st of October 2022. Pharmacists currently taking independent prescribing courses and those who apply before 1 October won't be affected by the changes. The new guidance was agreed at the council meeting on 8 September and went to the initial education and training Advisory Group on 22 September where it was well received, the GPhC said. "The guidance is now being finalised to reflect the discussions at the Council meeting and the initial education and training advisory group and will be published in October." The new guidance is relevant for both course providers and applicants and gives some specific suggestions and examples of what we may expect. It will support consistency in the way education providers applied the new standards and will help individual pharmacists to understand the relevant experience they would need before enrolling on a course.

The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has published updated guidance on online pharmacy services in Great Britain, introducing additional safeguards to prevent unsafe supply of high-risk medicines, including weight loss injections. Under the new rules, medicines used for weight-management and medicines requiring physical examination before a prescribing decision is made have been added to the list of high-risk medicines. When prescribing these medicines, prescribers can no longer rely solely on online questionnaires. Instead, they must independently verify patient information, either through timely two-way communication with the person, accessing the person's clinical records, or contacting the person's GP, their regular prescriber, or a third-party provider. These measures aim to prevent individuals from providing false information to obtain medicines that may not be clinically appropriate for them, reducing potential harm. The pharmacy regulator updated its guidance in response to concerns identified relating to unsafe prescribing and supply of medicines online.

The Council of the Pharmaceutical Society NI (PSNI) to remove the two-year requirement as a registered pharmacist to have an Independent Prescriber (IP) annotation on the pharmacy register in Northern Ireland. It has further endorsed that the two-year requirement for entry onto stand-alone pharmacist independent prescribing courses be removed and replaced with an assessment before admission, by course providers, based upon guidance provided by the regulator. In conjunction with the Department of Health, the PSNI will now work towards a further public consultation on the necessary legislative changes. Dr Jim Livingstone, president of the PSNI, said: "The Department of Health has set a clear direction which will see pharmacist independent prescribers becoming increasingly important in the delivery of pharmacy services in Northern Ireland. Our role is to protect the public, but we are clear that our regulatory objective should not be an unnecessary barrier to the development of the profession and enhanced services being provided to the public."

The National Pharmacy Association (NPA), representing independent community pharmacies, has called for tougher regulation of the online sale of weight loss jabs to protect patients amid a prediction of a new year's boom in demand. The association argues that current regulation "leaves the door open for medicines to be supplied without appropriate patient consultation and access to patient records." It has urged the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) to require greater consultation with patients before dispensing weight loss jabs and other high-risk medication online. The association stressed that online sellers should not just rely on information provided in online questionnaires but also gather important historical medical information before a full two-way consultation between prescriber and patient. Draft guidelines on weight loss medication The GPhC proposed changes to their current guidance for online pharmacies to improve patient safety. It launched a consultation on the revised guidance on 17 September, inviting feedback until 9 October 2024 from the public, carers, pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, other healthcare professionals, and pharmacy owners. In its response to proposed guidelines on prescribing weight loss medication, the NPA highlighted critical gaps, stating that proposed safeguards "still leaves the door open for medicines to be prescribed/supplied without appropriate two-way direct patient consultation and access to patient records for a full clinical picture particularly where high-risk medicines are involved, and the risk to patient safety remains".

Pharmacist supervision has been the subject of debate for as long as I can remember. Strikingly, no one is sure what supervision requires. The Human Medicines Regulations 2012 say it is a criminal offence to sell or supply Pharmacy medicines or Prescription Only Medicines unless a pharmacist makes the sale or supply or, if the transaction is carried out by a non-pharmacist, that person acts under the supervision of a pharmacist. Over the years, some people have argued that supervision requires a clinical check. Others say it requires an accuracy assessment. Yet others have asserted that it requires a final check before a medicine leaves the pharmacy. Things are made more uncertain by the NHS terms of service which require prescription medicines to be supplied under the direct supervision of a pharmacist. No one knows what the word "direct" adds. The wording of the Human Medicines Regulations is not identical to the wording of earlier legislation. In particular, on the only occasions when the courts have been called upon to interpret the requirement for supervision, the Pharmacy and Poisons Act 1933 was in force. In cases decided in 1943 and 1953, the courts decided that a pharmacist who was upstairs when a supply was made could not have been supervising; and that a sale was supervised by pharmacist standing at the cash desk because the pharmacist could intervene if a sale would not be appropriate.

Today I'm proud to share with you the statement we submitted to the UK Commission on Pharmacy Professional Leadership in which we set out what professional leadership means to RPS. I recognise we haven't always been clear in communicating our ideas to members and our external stakeholders. Through the Commission, and our own Independent Review of member participation and communications, we are determined to remedy this. We're committed to lead pharmacy in the best interest of patients and the professions. This means that sometimes we will need to take difficult decisions. We will do the right thing for the long term, ultimately driving what's best for patient care. There are some key changes we believe are necessary to fulfil the profession's ambitions. To achieve a more unified approach to pharmacy leadership, we believe both pharmacists and pharmacy technicians should be represented by RPS within professional faculties that capitalise on the strengths of each discipline whilst retaining distinct professional voices. Many of our members work with pharmacy technicians every day and know just how essential they are to their role and to patient care. We feel the same at RPS and it makes perfect sense to evolve into an organisation where both professions can advance their scope of practice, working in alignment as part of the wider multi-professional team. We will develop and implement post-registration curricula and credentialing for all pharmacists and pharmacy technicians working with patients and the public. To do this we will require formal delegation of authority by the GPhC.

Two weeks prior to the closing of the hub and spoke consultation, issues around patient safety, costs and competition as well as practicalities such as what to do with uncollected medicines were discussed in a webinar on hub and spoke dispensing on Wednesday (May 26). The webinar was organised by Sigma Pharmaceuticals in association with the National Pharmacy Association (NPA). NPA director of corporate affairs Gareth Jones chaired the event and was joined by Sigma's Hatul Shah and Raj Haria as well as NPA vice chair Nick Kaye and NPA head of advice and support services Jasmine Shah. Kaye said: "There are still many 'unknown unknowns' with hub and spoke and the jury's still out on any potential benefits. I have lots of reservations about cost and it worries me how efficient this is for the business and the long term sustainability for the sector as a whole. Above all we need to think about the patient at the centre of all this and the potential confusion for them." Jasmine Shah felt patient safety was going to be the key in regards to whether the spoke and the hub would hold the ultimate responsibility and "who is going to take the accountability as far as patient care goes". She added: "It is most important that GPhC standards and NHS requirement are both met in identifying all the risks associated with the arrangement with hub and spoke and ensuring that (patient safety) measures are in place. Everything that needs to be looked at is by putting the patient at heart of the arrangement and seeing what is the safest way for them to receive care from both spoke and hub."

The Pharmacists' Defence Association (PDA) has raised concern over the Health Education England (HEE)'s decision on cutting funding to independent prescribing training. The HEE has reportedly decided that no funding will be available to back-fill trainees undertaking the pharmacist independent prescribing (PIP) qualification, or for the supervision of trainees by DPPs and DMPs. The PDA noted that, whilst all successful trainee pharmacists will be entering the GPhC register as independent prescribers from 2026, the existing pharmacist workforce is reliant on opportunities to undertake prescriber training through release from their employment, and the ability to secure a Designated Medical Practitioner (DMP) or Designated Prescribing Practitioner (DPP) to support the 90 days of supervised practice required. The association said it has already heard examples of potential DMPs or DPPs requesting a significant fee from trainees before they will provide supervision, adding that meeting that request is not an option for many. "This latest decision threatens to undermine the availability of the large numbers of pharmacists seeing supervisors as more IP training becomes available," it said in a statement.