Click link to read our response. ghpconres1608b
Click link to read our response.
ghpconres1607 ESM Consultation
Response from: Guild of Healthcare Pharmacists – a pharmacy organisation representing professionals Response written by: Ewan Maule GHP Chair of Practice Deputy Chief Pharmacist – Operational Services Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust St Nicholas Hospital Jubilee Road Newcastle Upon Tyne NE3 3XT Ewan.email@example.com Consultation Response 1. Is the Introduction clear Yes 1a. What … Continue reading “GPhC – Consultation on standards for pharmacy professionals”
Response from: Guild of Healthcare Pharmacists – a pharmacy organisation representing professionals
Response written by:
GHP Chair of Practice
Deputy Chief Pharmacist – Operational Services Northumberland Tyne and Wear NHS Foundation Trust St Nicholas Hospital
Newcastle Upon Tyne NE3 3XT Ewan.firstname.lastname@example.org
1. Is the Introduction clear Yes
1a. What else, if anything, should be added to or removed from the introduction? N/A
2. Do you agree with this approach? Yes
2a. If you do not agree with this proposal, please explain why N/A
3. Are the standards clear? Yes
3a. What, if anything, is unclear?
The standards are clear and appropriate. They reflect the many and varied ways in which a pharmacy professional must behave and act in order to deliver safe and effective care and uphold the trust of the public. They could however be more concise (e.g. exercising professional judgement and behaving professionally could be integrated, as could demonstrating effective leadership which underpins all of the other standards.)
In addition, the infographic described patient centred care, but has ‘safe and effective’ care at the centre. It may look more appropriate to have the patient explicitly at the centre.
4. Are there any standards you do not agree with? (if so, please explain)
Demonstrating effective leadership. We agree with the principles described under ‘applying the standard’ however feel that badging this as ‘leadership’ may be misleading and cause confusion, and that these are perhaps better described as facets of professionalism (hence the comment above regarding integration).
‘Leadership’ has a particular expectation and is often misunderstood; some professionals and pre- registration trainees may (incorrectly) regard this as something which doesn’t apply to them. It is important that the standards are accessible to all.
5. Are there any other standards that you think are missing? (if so, please explain) No
6. Do you think the section ‘applying the standards’ is useful in helping you to understand the standards?
7. Do you think the ‘applying the standards’ sections are clear and easy to understand? Yes, notwithstanding the comments above regarding standard 9.
8. What is unclear? Please say which standard or standards you mean, and explain why you think there is a problem with the ‘applying the standard’ section.
9. Are there any examples that it would be useful to include in the sections ‘applying the standards’?
Some examples may be useful, in particular those which may illustrate the section under standard 6 about these standards applying equally outside of the working day.
As the sharing of information between providers and accessibility of information increases exponentially it would be worth citing some examples of appropriate and inappropriate sharing.
10. The new standards and their explanations make clear that a pharmacy professional’s personal values and beliefs must be balanced with the care they give people who use pharmacy services. Do you agree with our approach?
11. If you do not agree with this approach, please explain why.
12. Do you have any other comments?
We support these standards and are keen that they are upheld in order to maintain public confidence in the profession. We are happy to support the dissemination and roll out of these standards in any channel available to us.