Pharmacists have voiced fears that CPD has become a "tick-box exercise" that fails to encourage genuine professional development, following news that nearly 100 pharmacists had either been struck off or were at risk of being sanctioned by the GPhC in the past year.

The current system is "not fit for purpose" and must become more flexible to meet the demands of today's pharmacy environment, leading pharmacists told C+D yesterday (April 29).

C+D readers also voiced doubts over the model, which requires pharmacists to make a minimum of nine CPD entries per year. In a poll of 151 readers conducted between April 24 and April 30, only 44 per cent said completing CPD had aided their professional development.

The current system is "laborious" and requires more flexibility, says RPS English Pharmacy Board member Ash Soni	More on CPD requirements 47 pharmacists could be struck off for CPD failure GPhC pledges to minimise time and costs of revalidation GPhC continual assessment plans spark workload fears
	The General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) maintained that the system enables pharmacists to demonstrate their professional development. But the regulator told C+D it would focus "more effectively on quality rather than quantity" in its work to replace the CPD model with revalidation, which is due to come into force in 2018.

Ash Soni, a member of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's English Pharmacy Board, branded the current system "a bit laborious" and called for more flexibility in the format.

"We have to make sure the process is relevant and a genuine view of what you've done, rather than [just completing] a set of boxes," Mr Soni told C+D. "If you could just give a narrative [of what you've done], that would be much easier."

Numark head of pharmacy Mimi Lau echoed the comments. She said that although the system "works well overall", the method of recording CPD is "very rigid in terms of structure".

"From a regulator's point of view, you need some mechanism of assessing [CPD], so you do need to record it," she said. "How you improve on that process of recording is a good question."

Fin McCaul, chair of the Independent Pharmacy Federation, argued that the process must be redesigned with the future goals of the profession in mind. He stressed that the CPD format is no longer "fit for purpose" in an environment that places increasing value on patient outcomes and collaboration with other healthcare professionals.

"We need to find a better way of recording what we're learning and putting it into practice," he told C+D.

Pharmacy would need to think about where it wants to be in 10 years' time, Mr McCaul stressed. "It's time to move on to the next stage, but we can't [do that] unless we're clear about what we're trying to do," he said.

Last week, C+D reported that 52 pharmacists were struck off the professional register for failing to complete their CPD in 2013 and 47 pharmacists were at risk of facing the same fate.

Pharmacists responding to the news were divided over the value of submitting CPD. While some argued it has little relation to actual competency, others maintained that the system encourages ongoing learning.

	How could the CPD system be improved to better suit the demands of today's pharmacy environment?   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