Cookie policy: This site uses cookies (small files stored on your computer) to simplify and improve your experience of this website. Cookies are small text files stored on the device you are using to access this website. For more information please take a look at our terms and conditions. Some parts of the site may not work properly if you choose not to accept cookies.

Join

Subscribe or Register

Existing user? Login

Supervision plans may push up insurance

Government plans to allow community pharmacies to operate without a pharmacist on the premises will inevitably affect liability, insurance providers warned this week.

The Chemists’ Defence Association said it was essential that any moves towards expanding the pharmacists’ professional role must not compromise patient safety.

CDA chief executive John D’Arcy said: “It is essential that any changes are made in a cautious and measured way to ensure that the need to expand pharmacists’ roles is balanced against any compromise to patient safety.

“It is also essential that there is no weakening of pharmacy’s key value proposition — ready and easy access to a pharmacist.”

He accepted that role changes inevitably introduce a new risk profile which would have to be addressed by risk management strategies including standard operating procedures.

The Pharmacists’ Defence Association, which has 10,000 members, also says that the profession would face increased liability if remote supervision, outlined in the current Health Bill, becomes law.

It is currently surveying its members on the changes, which will be debated at its annual conference at the end of February.

PDA chairman Mark Koziol said the results so far revealed concern that some employers may use remote supervision to cut costs rather than to develop the profession.

“Even though standard operating procedures are already in place my association deals daily with incidents which are dispensing errors or near misses,” he said.

The suggestion that standard operating procedures will protect patients in the absence of a pharmacist is a “fallacious argument”, Mr Koziol added.

Citation: The Pharmaceutical Journal URI: 10020825

Have your say

For commenting, please login or register as a user and agree to our Community Guidelines. You will be re-directed back to this page where you will have the ability to comment.

Recommended from Pharmaceutical Press

RPS publications

Pharmaceutical Press is the publishing division of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and is a leading provider of authoritative pharmaceutical information used throughout the world.

Visit rpharms.com

Search an extensive range of the world’s most trusted resources

Powered by MedicinesComplete
  • Print
  • Share
  • Comment
  • Save
  • Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

Newsletter Sign-up

Want to keep up with the latest news, comment and CPD articles in pharmacy and science? Subscribe to our free alerts.