Accuracy checks - who should feel ashamed?

Login to continue

Email

Password

Remember me

Forgotten your password? Caps Lock is on.

The page you are looking for is only available to logged in members of Chemist+Druggist.

Not a member yet?

Register now

If you are not a registered user, then please sign up here. Registering is free and takes just seconds. It gives you access to up-to-the minute news alerts and analysis, all our top bloggers.

If you experience any difficulties logging in or registering, or have any other questions, please contact Chemist+Druggist at haveyoursay@chemistanddruggist.co.uk

Comment on this article

You are not currently logged in. Login or register

Your Comments

Sachin Badiani, Other healthcare professional Posted on 26 August 2011.

Zoe, good article. We have had underpayments from NHSBSA (which were corrected when we wrote letters) and I will try this weekend to forward them to both PSNC and C&D. I don't know if this has been discussed, but would a general media campaign on the BBC News or Sky News work - something like "Pharmacies not being paid correctly by the Government"?? And get some representatives from the sector to put their points across.. Sign in to vote. Top

Martin Bennett, Other pharmacist Posted on 27/08/11 10:24 in reply to Sachin Badiani.

The problem is that a small level of inaccuracies has always been accepted. The default is to underpay - this was explained to me by the PPA 20 years ago and was confirmed by PSNC. They calculate the total underpayment and that was credited to the Balance Sheet the following year. A more transparent system is needed to we can view individual payments, but let's not get too distracted by this. Pricing is well over 99% accurate. Of far more importance at the moment is the results of the Cost of Service Inquiry. That shows it costs over £3 to dispense each item. PSNC's figures shows that the gross profit for June is £2.07. Even allowing for the £500m profit on purchasing that still leaves an average loss of over 40p per item. That's the big issue we should all be concentrating on and whilst it would be nice to see the PPD improve from 99.5% accuracy to 99.8% accuracy or whatever the current figures are. It's what it costs us to provide the service that's the big problem. Give me 50p extra per item and I'll happily live with the PPD's current level of accuracy. Martin Bennett, Sheffield Declaration of interest. I did serve on the PPA Board at one time. Sign in to vote. Top

Jenny Meade, Community pharmacist Posted on 27 August 2011.

accuracy of what?? without me having to spend an hour looking up previous ref. to the subject---- Sign in to vote. Top

Zoe Smeaton, C+D News Editor Posted on 30/08/11 07:55 in reply to Jenny Meade.

Thanks all for your comments. Jenny, apologies for any confusion. We're talking about the accuracy of the payments NHS Prescription Services makes to pharmacists every month to reimburse them for the prescriptions they have dispensed. The monthly payment makes up a large proportion of pharmacy businesses' income, but some businesses are reporting significant inaccuracies every month, often leaving them underpaid by thousands of pounds. Our campaign has been pushing for improvements in accuracy to prevent businesses being underpaid. Sachin, yes, we have indeed thought about getting a story in the national media - I think people would be shocked to hear that the NHS is not paying its contractors correctly. We're currently following up a story on the campaign which, if it turns out to be correct, will demonstrate just how bad things have been for some pharmacies, and we have been advised that it would be of interest to some television producers. And finally, Martin, thanks also for your views. While I agree the cost of service inquiry is important and should be a (if not the) key focus for the sector, I can't help thinking that there will be little point in getting 50p extra per item agreed if some contractors are then not going to be paid that much. If everyone were to be paid 99 per cent of it, that might also be acceptable, but the reality is that under the current pricing system that is simply not the case. As I've explained in my piece this week, NHS PS is 99.8 (ish) per cent accurate overall, but it only gets to that figure by using its underpayments to cancel out its overpayments. In reality, and as PSNC has confirmed, some contractors are paid well outside that 0.02 per cent variance figure. NHS PS can't estimate just how inaccurately some contractors are paid, and PSNC hasn't revealed the results of its audits, but certainly PSNC considers the accuracy levels to some contractors to be bad enough to have branded the system "unfit for purpose" and to demand a new payment system. It seems to me that the COSI could be an opportune moment to consider both a new contract and a new payment system together - fair payments that are paid properly to all contractors should surely be the aim. Zoe Smeaton, News Editor, C+D Sign in to vote. Top

Martin Bennett, Other pharmacist Posted on 30/08/11 20:58 in reply to Zoe Smeaton.

Zoe- I agree with your last sentence. The only saving grace about CIP is that without it, the PPD would be months and months behind in payment. Forecast from the DH was that by 2008 70% of scripts would arrive at the PPA electronically and funding was based on that. Luckily the PPA opted for a system that would enable them to cope with the increase in prescription numbers even if the planned 70% arriving electronically did not materialise by 2008. The downside is that this has resulted in a reduction in accuracy. Sign in to vote. Top