The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) will no longer redact information that could identify a registrant's ethnicity from cases considered by its Investigating Committee (IC).
But it will be consider how to address disparities at an earlier stage of the process.
GPhC trialled redacting ethnicity data from IC cases
The GPhC tested the approach of anonymising IC cases between April 2023 and March 2024 to remove any information that could reveal or imply ethnicity.
The IC is one element of decision making for a registrant undergoing an investigation into their fitness to practise. It follows triage, which during the project year, determined the outcome on c4,200 cases, and the pre IC stage, during which just under 300 cases were determined, the GPhC said.
Related Article: Pharmacies told to ‘immediately review’ adverts for weight-loss meds
Where suitable, information was redacted from the GPhC IC case bundles that relayed any reference to the name, religion, country of birth, and / or any other information that might show or imply the registrant’s ethnicity.
But the regulator has decided not to proceed with this approach, saying that there was 'insufficient' evidence it made the process fairer and that the 'significant further resource commitment' required could not be justified.
Analysis of outcomes inconclusive though registrants said process 'felt fairer'
Papers presented to the GPhC council meeting on Thursday 24 April showed that during the trial period, 54% of the 84 cases listed for an IC meeting were considered suitable or able to be redacted – with others considered unsuitable because they involved allegations of discrimination, CCTV evidence, or excessive volumes of paperwork, among other reasons.
When the outcome of IC and FtPC cases during the trial period was compared to the previous year, the analysis relating to ethnicity did not change, the GPhC said.
But Dionne Spence, GPhC chief enforcement officer and deputy registrar, said in papers submitted to the council: 'In spite of this comparison, with the low numbers involved we consider that we are unable draw any meaningful quantitative analysis from this project. It is also the case that no review has been conducted of those cases in order to form an objective assessment of the appropriateness of the outcome reached.'
A sample of registrants undergoing the process were asked whether anonymisation made it feel fairer. Some 59% said they felt it had, while the rest felt there was little or no effect.
Related Article: Pharmacists issued warning over social media use
'It must be remembered, however, that it is likely that this would have been the only time for which these registrants would have been through the process, and therefore their subjective assessment of comparative fairness, though valid, cannot be referenced against an alternative non-anonymised approach,' the GPhC papers noted.
Anonymising cases increased workload for IC
The IC also reported difficulty following cases that identified registrants using numbers rather than names, as well as issues with the redaction software that meant some details that should have been redacted were not.
The time taken to redact cases also increased workload for IC members, with one one reporting that redaction work for one meeting alone took over 18 hours, as well as leading to some delays in papers getting to IC members.
GPhC council agrees not to continue redacting ethnicity in IC cases
At the GPhC meeting last week, the council agreed with the paper's recommendation that ethnicity redactions at IC stage were to be discontinued.
'The evidence from our evaluation, although heavily caveated due to low volumes, has not indicated a positive or negative impact of redaction on the potential for bias in IC decision making, and so the evidence is insufficient to justify the significant further resource commitment which would be required to continue undertaking redactions at the IC stage,' Ms Spence told The Pharmacist following the council meeting.
Related Article: GPhC issues warning over unregulated products
GPhC to look into disparities at earlier stage of concerns raised
And she highlighted that there was 'much more evidence of potential bias in the beginning of the process in the age, gender and ethnicity of registrants who are complained about by those raising concerns (ie in the concerns we receive in the first place), rather than later on at the IC stage'.
'We are currently analysing the data relating to the protected characteristics of the pharmacists and pharmacy technicians involved in our Fitness to Practise processes in 2024-25. The Council agreed that once we have that data, further work will be undertaken to consider how we can address the disparities identified at the earlier stage of the process, when concerns are raised, which appears to be the most significant cause for concern potential concern and enquiry,' Ms Spence said.
Have your say
Please add your comment in the box below. You can include links, but HTML is not permitted. Please note that comments are not moderated before publication and the views expressed are those of the user and do not reflect the views of The Pharmacist. Remember that submission of comments is governed by our Terms and Conditions. You can also read our full guidelines on article comments here – but please be aware that you are legally liable for any libellous or offensive comments that you make. If you have a complaint about a comment or are concerned that a comment breaches our terms and conditions, please use the ‘Report this comment’ function to alert our web team.