Additional requirements for responsible pharmacists will create 'unnecessary bureaucracy'

Introducing extra requirements for pharmacists to be able to oversee the day-to-day running of a pharmacy will create ‘unnecessary bureaucracy’ and risk undermining service delivery, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) has warned.

In its response to the General Pharmaceutical Council’s (GPhC’s) draft standards for responsible and superintendent pharmacists, the RPS said that undergraduate and foundation training should adequately prepare pharmacists for taking on the responsible pharmacist duties.

Responsible pharmacists oversee the day-to-day running of the pharmacy, including the safe and effective operation of the business.

The RPS’s response also said that requiring pharmacists to be qualified for a minimum time before being able to undertake a responsible pharmacist role could limit opportunities and reduce the pool of eligible candidates.

It added: ‘The responsible pharmacist must be a registered pharmacist, and introducing any additional requirements would create unnecessary bureaucracy and make pharmacy practice more difficult.

Related Article: Payment percentage for statutory branded medicines scheme drops to 16.5%

‘Adding further criteria would also reduce the number of pharmacists able to take on the role and risk undermining the delivery of services.

‘Rather than imposing minimum requirements, the key consideration should be ensuring that the pharmacy operates safely.’

The RPS has also urged the GPhC to offer a ‘clear and unambiguous resolution’ on the duties of the responsible pharmacist and the authorising pharmacist.

The RPS highlighted ‘ongoing ambiguity’ around the role of the responsible pharmacist in relation to authorisation. This stems from one regulation stating that only the authorising pharmacist can amend or withdraw an authorisation they have issued.

However, the GPhC draft standards suggest that the responsible pharmacist can vary an authorisation – for example, situations where patient safety is at risk.

The RPS also said that any additional requirements for superintendent pharmacists, who are responsible for professional and clinical management of a pharmacy, should ‘not be restrictive’ and revalidation requirements should be ‘proportionate to the role’.

The RPS felt there was ‘limited clarity’ about the responsibilities of pharmacy owners and how their role intersects with the superintendent pharmacist.

‘With the growing number of private clinics using patient group directions (PGDs) and independent pharmacist prescribers for services such as vaccinations, aesthetics, and longevity, there is a need to clarify whether oversight of these services should fall under GPhC longevity,’ the RPS added.

Related Article: Research review: a look at the latest clinical papers

The GPhC consultation proposes a number of standards for superintendent and responsible pharmacists, which the RPS agreed will strengthen the safe and effective running of a pharmacy business.

But the RPS said the standards will not make the accountabilities and responsibilities of responsible pharmacists clear.

Professor Claire Anderson, president of the RPS, said: ‘Pharmacists play a vital leadership role in ensuring patients receive safe, effective care. Our response reflects the profession’s commitment to proportionate, workable standards that recognise competence and support professional judgement.

‘We want regulations that enable responsible and superintendent pharmacists to deliver the highest standards of care across all settings.’

The GPhC announced in December that from January next year pharmacists will be able to authorise pharmacy technicians to hand out checked and bagged prescriptions when pharmacists are ‘absent or treated as absent'.

Related Article: MenB vaccination programme to be rolled out in pharmacies

The GPhC said the new standards for responsible and superintendent pharmacists will be published before these changes to pharmacy supervision rules come into effect to help everyone involved understand their responsibilities and accountabilities.

These new rules include:

• Allowing pharmacists to authorise a pharmacy technician to undertake or supervise the preparation, assembly, dispensing and sale and supply of medicines, that would otherwise need to be performed by or under the supervision of a pharmacist;
• Allowing pharmacy technicians to take primary responsibility for the preparation and assembly of medicinal products in hospital aseptic facilities.