EXCLUSIVE

Almost half of pharmacy professionals feel there is no way to reduce inappropriate MURs other than to scrap the service, a C+D poll has revealed.

Some 45% of 320 respondents to the poll, which ran on the C+D website from April 14-20, agreed the service is "not fit for purpose".

The results come in the wake of allegations made by the Guardian earlier this month that Boots pressures its pharmacists to carry out unnecessary MURs for profit – a claim the multiple told C+D it “doesn’t recognise”.

The remaining 55% of respondents to C+D's poll were evenly split on alternative ways to prevent inappropriate MURs, with 19% opting for reducing or removing payments for delivering the service.

Another 18% called for stronger regulation from the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC), while the same proportion said pharmacists need condition-specific guidelines on how to carry out MURs.

Twitter response: Scrap or salvage?

Pharmacists shared their views on the service's future during C+D's Twitter debate last week (April 22).

@BrendonJiang @ChemistDruggist Scrap 400, cap=target, if must have limit make it volume based, some of us could do more #busy #spreadthework

— Lucy (@LucyUpTheHill) April 22, 2016

@CandDBeth linking to volume compounds the commoditisation of service - we've got to focus on care rather than volume #MURabuse

— Joe Brogan (@broganjoe69) 22 April 2016

@CandDLilian @ChemistDruggist Ban the services? I disagree. Pharmacists committing #MURabuse should face @TheGPhC disciplinary committee

— Brendon Jiang (@BrendonJiang) 22 April 2016

This is the latest in a series of articles exploring the issue of MUR abuse, following on from our Twitter debate. We'll be sharing more exclusive data on the profession's view on MURs, and coverage of the debate, throughout the week.