Posts Tagged ‘rpsgb’

New PLB stakeholder day 19.10.09

Tuesday, October 20th, 2009

I am conscious that locum pharmacists tend to miss events such as the Stakeholder Day that was held at RPSGD headquarters in London yesterday. As a result, I attended the meeting on your behalf and will attempt to pass on the key information i gathered in this three posts. This one will cover CPD and Local Practice Forums:

Presidents Welcome

Steve Churton gave an impassioned speech about the new PLB and about how the move to a devolved membership body and regulator marked the most important change to the profession of pharmacy in over 150 years. He explained that over the day he would try to give delegates a feel of the culture of the new PLB and the services that will be able to members..

He also mentioned that the name of the new body will be ……The Royal Pharmaceutical Society!!! Apparantly the members of the new body can decide to change post launch if they want to but a change of name would have meant more changes to the Royal Charter which could have delayed the launch which is due in April 2010.  A General Election called before May could delay it as the new body needs to be sanctioned in parliament.

CPD

One of the main advantages of the new body will be the support it will provide for CPD. The new PLB will not “police” CPD this will be done by the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC). I was actually sat next to the lady who has set the criteria for CPD at the GPhC and she said that the CPD needs to be relevant to your practice and will only count at CPD if you have identified a particular need to improve either practice or knowledge. Simply attending lots of CPPE courses doesn’t constitute CPD.

As has been previous publised, pharmacists will need to submit nine pieces of CPD each year (Or when requested by the GPhC.) The nine pieces should be spread throughout the year and go though the process:

Reflection/Planning/Action/Evaluation

Pharmacist will have six weeks to submit CPD when requested.

The new PLB will support pharmacists with their CPD by offering the www.uptodate.org.uk website for recording CPD, They will also offer to review five CPD entries free of charge to members before they are submitted to the GPhC AS it has been identified that many members are worried at CPD requirements and how CPD should be recorded.

Local Practice Forums

You may have seen in the PJ lately articles about the New Local Practice Forums (LPF) these will replace branches and regions over the next two years. One in West Yorkshire has been particularly successful. These are very much seen as key to the success of the new RPSGB and the driving force behind delivery of the services for the new body.

There will be about forty LPF’s in England, five in Wales and I think seven in Scotland. The geographical spread of each will be controlled by each LPF’s but it is envisioned that they will be based around Schools of pharmacy or larger teaching hospitals.

Information of advisory services, virtual networks and myth busting to follow on Friday.

RP Interpretations “unlawful”

Thursday, October 8th, 2009

So Lloyds Pharmacy and Bupa have already have their interpretations of the RP regulations brought into question by the RPSGB (PJ Online article below)

http://www.pjonline.com/news/pda_claims_rp_rules_are_being_interpreted_unfairly

I guess that this was always going to happen with any new working practices but it will be interesting to see how the RPSGB respond. The problems have been highlighted by the PDA who suggest that the Society may have changed the RP guidelines in favour of the multiples. I hope that this was not done intentionally and that the multiples wouldn’t “place” people on the council to make sure their commercial interests are represented ahead of the professional interests of their employee pharmacists. Maybe I’m being niave  to think they wouldn’t as their main objective is to maximise shareholder (or owner) return. Linking this to the recent European Court Ruling

http://www.pjonline.com/forum/pharmacy_ownership_0

The PDA have shown that they are acting in the interest of the individual pharmacist. Is this an example of how a leopard never changes it’s spots and that the new PLB will still put bricks-and-mortar pharmacies ahead of flesh-and-blood pharmacist as it always seems to have done. I hope it isn’t because if it is, why should i join it?

RPSGB clarification on RP

Tuesday, September 22nd, 2009

The RPSGB has issued further guidance on the RP regulations due to come into effect from October 1st.

http://www.rpsgb.org/pdfs/rprequirementsguid.pdf?dm_i=EQ,1Z85,1SSR5,6BFT,1

Where are the “real” pharmacists in the C+D senate

Friday, July 10th, 2009

I read a post on Twitter today about a C+D senate – a new “think tank” looking at the future of community pharmacy. Unfortunately, like most similar initiative it’s clearly focused on pharmacy – the business not pharmacy the profession.

http://www.chemistanddruggist.co.uk/senate

The busineses already have the CCA, the NPA have taken over the RPSGB. Where are the forums representing individual pharmacists? Come on PDA!

Pharmacy services to the socially excluded

Thursday, July 9th, 2009

I’ve been contacted by the RPSGB who are looking for good examples of pharmacists who are providing services to the socially excluded.  I thought it best that i forward this on to you all and for you to respond to Joanna personally.

Dear Mr Hockey 27891_9446_logo.jpg

The RPSGB has been asked to respond to a Government consultation on the healthcare requirements of the socially excluded. It seeks to examine what is already available, the standard of these services and what should, ideally, be provided.

This is an opportunity to demonstrate the range of services currently provided for the socially excluded and how pharmacy can further enhance these. The RPSGB will submit a response using case studies to demonstrate how well pharmacy is able to offer care to the socially excluded.

We would like to hear about your examples of good practice in providing care to the following social groups:


1 Those with no recourse to public funds
2 Refugees/ asylum seekers
3 Homelessness
4 Care leavers
5 Carers
6 Remote rural areas
7 Ex-servicemen/women
8 Mental health problems
9 Learning disabled
10 Substance misusers
11 Physically Disabled
12 Gypsy, Roma Travellers

13 Ethno-religious minorities
14 Sex Workers
15 Non-English speaking linguistic minorities
16 Men/Women suffering violence
17 Offenders
18 Unemployed
19 Those in severe and persistent poverty
20 Migrant / itinerant workers
21 Those in severely deprived neighbourhoods
22 NEETS young adults
23 Old older people

Please include:
- The type of service
- A b
rief description of your example/s
- The patient group
- Your contact details: name, email and telephone number

Send your example/s to Joanna Edwards via email on joanna.edwards@rpsgb.org by 5pm on Wednesday, 15 July.
We recognise that this is short notice, but would appreciate any information that you can provide us with within this timeframe.


Thanking you in advance.

Kind regards,


Joanna Edwards

Policy Analyst