The president of the Association of Pharmacy Technicians UK (APTUK) has invited stakeholders to discuss any concerns over the role of pharmacy technicians in pharmacy practice.
Nicola Stockmann said she wanted to ‘discuss collaboratively any constructive feedback and concerns’ around the role.
Her comments come after a blog published by the Pharmacists’ Defence Association (PDA) last week drew parallels between the debate around the future role of pharmacy technicians and that among doctors about physician associates (PAs), anaesthesia associates (AAs), and surgical care practitioners – collectively named as ‘medical associate professions (MAP)’.
Campaign group Anaesthetists United is taking legal action against the medical regulator for having 'failed to set any meaningful national standards' on limits of the tasks of PAs and AAs.
The group has said it has heard of patients receiving consultations and treatment from MAPs, thinking they were seeing a doctor, or without a doctor present to supervise.
And in a blog post, PDA chair Mark Koziol suggested that similar issues existed around the role of pharmacy technicians.
He said that patients 'may not know who they were dealing with in the pharmacy; a master’s degree qualified pharmacist or an NVQ level 3 qualified, or even grand-parented, pharmacy technician'.
'When skill mix is replaced with role substitution, patient interest is evidently no longer being prioritised and issues around patient safety emerge,' Mr Koziol said.
He has previously raised concerns that less than half of the current pharmacy technician register had completed the NVQ level 3 training, with the remainder being added to the register under a ‘grandparent’ clause as they were already working as pharmacy technicians when the register was created in 2011.
In his blog published last week, Mr Koziol said that with clearly defined complementary roles, healthcare skill mix models can work well to increase capacity and improve services.
But he suggested that when the PDA had tried to raise 'sensible discussions about role definition, skill mix, defining scope of practice and the link to patient safety', this had sometimes been labelled 'as unhelpful and even toxic'.
He said the PDA would continue to take 'a very close interest' in the case brought against the medical regulator by Anaesthetists United.
And he said the PDA would 'use the lessons in its pursuit of a sensible approach in the discussions around skill mix, scope of practice and the roles of pharmacy technicians in our profession’.
In response, Nicola Stockmann, APTUK president, told The Pharmacist: 'I extend an invitation to work with any stakeholders to discuss collaboratively any constructive feedback and concerns; whilst also acknowledging this as an opportunity where omissions in current information regarding our profession can be supported and addressed.'
'APTUK as the professional leadership body for pharmacy technicians will continue to advocate with pride for the invaluable role of pharmacy technicians as an essential part of the pharmacy team, comprising also of pharmacists and pharmacy support staff.
'Pharmacy technicians are autonomous, skilled, registered and regulated healthcare professionals, operating within a defined, safe scope of practice prioritising patient safety,' she said.
Also responding to Mr Koziol's blog, a spokesperson for the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) told The Pharmacist that the regulator regularly meets with the PDA, and expects 'to discuss their views and the wider issues at a future meeting with them'.
Last month, the Royal College of GPs (RCGP) voted to completely oppose the role of PAs in general practice last month, following a call to halt recruitment earlier in the year.
And the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges (AoMRC) has called upon the health secretary to order a ‘rapid review’ of the safety and efficiency of PAs.
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.