The gap between the experiences of pre-registration students in multiples and those in smaller businesses is widening, a General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) survey has found.

Eighty-two per cent of students who trained in a national multiple rated the quality of their training as "good" or "very good", found the survey of 829 students who completed their placements in 2013-14.

This compared to 69% of those who trained in a smaller multiple and 72% of those in a business of fewer than five pharmacies, the GPhC revealed on Tuesday (September 22).

This was a "greater difference" than the previous year, when 77% of students in multiples were happy with their experience compared with 71% of those who trained in medium-sized and independent businesses, it said.

There were also continued discrepancies between the experiences of students in hospital and community sectors, found the survey, carried out by the University of Bradford and market research company Information by Design in 2014.

While 89% of hospital trainees rated the quality of their training as "good" or "very good", this dropped to 74% for those in the community sector. Hospital trainees also reported a better of quality of support during their placements, with 94% rating this as "excellent", "good" or "adequate", compared to 82% of community pharmacy students.

Overall, only 69% of students thought their training had "fully prepared them" for the pre-registration exam.

Different experience for tutors

A survey of 675 pre-registration tutors conducted simultaneously highlighted differences between how tutors and trainees viewed the quality of training. Just 1% of tutors thought their trainee would rate the quality of the training as "poor" or "very poor", compared with 11% of trainees who described their experience in this way.

GPhC chief executive Duncan Rudkin said the regulator will investigate “specific issues” raised by the surveys, including the “small but significant number of trainees who are unhappy with their training”.

The survey is part of a three-year project that will help the regulator decide how it approaches education and training standards.

Last year, the GPhC vowed to investigate discrepancies in pre-registration training after a survey of graduates from 2013 revealed variations between the quality of training between different sectors and regions.

How should the GPhC address discrepancies in pre-registration training?

We want to hear your views, but please express them in the spirit of a constructive, professional debate. For more information about what this means, please click here to see our community principles and information