Almost three quarters of CPD entries are “patchy”, research has revealed.

Only 21 per cent of 1,000 CPD records assessed by research company IFF Research on behalf of the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) were found to contain enough detail to show the registrant had “genuinely reflected” on the gaps in their knowledge, IFF said.

Seventy-three per cent of the records - submitted by 125 pharmacists, 71 technicians and 4 pre-registration students -  contained “mixed” or “patchy” detail, while six per cent contained “minimal detail”, IFF said in the report published by the GPhC ahead of its council meeting today (June 11).

The recording process only showed how engaged pharmacists and technicians were with noting down their CPD work, and it was “difficult to truly gauge” how involved they were with CPD activities, the company concluded.

IFF stressed registrants and CPD assessors were "satisfied...on the whole" about the current CPD process, with pharmacists and pharmacy technicians "particularly positive" about being able to record their entries online.

Ninety-three per cent of registrants said that they had learned what they intended from CPD activity, but “most” said completion of their records could be “eratic due to varying workloads”, IFF added.

Many registrants and CPD assessors felt the documentation process was a “tick box exercise” that had “little impact" on the way they practised, IFF said. The structure of the process and the lack of feedback after the documents were submitted to the GPhC meant they felt records “did not have to contain any evidence of reflection to pass a review", IFF stressed.

Wanted: more detailed feedback

The most common feedback it received from the 30 pharmacists, technicians and assessors it interviewed during its research was that they wanted more frequent and detailed feedback on CPD records by the GPhC.

The GPhC noted that some registrants believed it should do more to “influence topics undertaken for CPD or encourage diversity in CPD activities”. It acknowledged that this “may be an area where we can share examples of good practice and encourage certain types of CPD activity”.

The regulator said it would “carefully consider” whether to make any changes to CPD requirements as a result of the report and present its plans in September.

The GPhC said its review of CPD requirements was part of the development of a model for continuing fitness-to-practise. The model would be evaluated later this year, with plans to pilot the project in early 2016, it said in its February council papers.
 
 

What changes to CPD would you like to see?

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