Pharmacy technicians are concerned by research that suggests community pharmacists are still reluctant to let them check medicines unsupervised.

An "overwhelming" number of community pharmacists in England did not want technicians to conduct final accuracy checking, hand out bagged prescriptions or dispense established repeat prescriptions in their absence, according to a report funded and published by Pharmacy Research UK last month (January 16).

But accuracy checking had become "a core activity" for technicians in both hospitals and community pharmacies, the Association of Pharmacy Technicians UK (APTUK) told C+D on Friday (January 31). APTUK president Steve Acres said he was concerned pharmacists' cautious attitude was due to a "potential misunderstanding" over which pharmacy staff could be trained and employed as accuracy checkers.

Many pharmacists do not want technicians to conduct final accuracy checking, hand out bagged prescriptions or dispense established repeat prescriptions in their absence, a study revealed	More on pharmacy technicians GPhC pledges to make technician training 'fit for the future' Technicians hit back over pharmacist PGD snub Pharmacists reject calls for technicians to work under PGDs
	"Our position is clear: final accuracy checking should be restricted to pharmacists and pharmacy technicians who, by dint of registration, are professionally accountable for their actions," Mr Acres said.

For the Pharmacy Research UK study, researchers from Manchester Pharmacy School surveyed 546 pharmacists and 774 technicians from hospitals and community settings about the perceived risks associated with different activities and services.

Community pharmacists were the most cautious of these groups and the only ones that deemed checking bagged prescriptions, dispensing repeat prescriptions and accuracy checking too risky to be carried out by unsupervised technicians, the study found.

However, community pharmacists expressed a "high level of agreement" that technicians should become "more accountable for the tasks they perform" since they had become registered professionals, the research revealed.

Familiarity with the pharmacy team and the previous experience of the technician were both important factors in determining whether a pharmacist trusted them to work unsupervised, with locum pharmacists expressing greater caution than others about technicians working in their absence.

In contrast, technicians in both hospitals and community pharmacies felt "significantly more confident" in performing technical activities themselves.

Mr Acres said the study echoed many of his organisation's views about the perception of technicians in pharmacy and called for pharmacists and technicians to work collaboratively to move the profession forward.

There was "great potential" for community pharmacy to learn from the "skill mix" of pharmacists and technicians in hospital settings, he added.

Last year, the APTUK hit back at pharmacists' rejection of a proposal to allow technicians to supply medicines under patient group directions (PGDs), arguing there was "strong evidence" technicians could deliver safe services if supported correctly.

How much responsibility do you give your technicians? Comment below or email us at [email protected] You can also find C+D on Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook