The Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) has urged the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) to provide “greater clarity” in its draft standards for responsible and superintendent pharmacists.
In its response to the GPhC’s consultation on the proposed changes, the RPS called for “competence-based requirements, clearer regulatory alignment, and practical consideration of challenges faced across different pharmacy settings”.
The consultation, launched in December, sought views on the GPhC’s draft standards for responsible and superintendent pharmacists - as well as new rules for responsible pharmacists - ahead of new legislation on authorisation that came into effect in January.
Read more: GPhC proposes authorisation reforms in new consultation
The RPS said it “strongly opposed prescriptive requirements for superintendent pharmacists” such as “minimum number of years qualified”, adding that “competence should be demonstrated through skills, knowledge and professional judgement”.
The body agreed that the minimum standards expected of responsible pharmacists “are those of any registered pharmacist”, it added, and that “undergraduate and foundation training should adequately prepare pharmacists to assume responsible pharmacist responsibilities at the point of registration”.
It also noted that there is a “regulatory conflict” in that legislation states that “only an authorising pharmacist may vary or withdraw an authorisation”, while the GPhC draft standards “allow a responsible pharmacist to do so”.
Read more: Supervision and authorisation: what’s changing, when, and how?
“RPS is supportive of the provision for responsible pharmacists to do this, as their overarching responsibility is for the safe running of a pharmacy,” it said. “However, this requires unambiguous resolution from the regulator.”
The RPS emphasised its “unequivocal support for one pharmacist being in charge of one pharmacy at a time” and described this as “a cornerstone of public assurance and professional oversight”.
And it said its members “were broadly satisfied with the current two‑hour absence rule”, but stressed “the need for further exploration of how it is used in practice, potential conflicts with NHS terms of service, and specific challenges for remote, rural and island pharmacies”.
Draft standards and rules
The GPhC has proposed the following five standards for superintendent pharmacists:
- Provide strategic and professional leadership
- Develop a workforce with the right skills, knowledge and experience
- Delegate responsibly and make sure there are clear lines of accountability
- Maintain and strengthen governance to ensure safe and effective delivery of pharmacy services
- Make sure the pharmacy environment and premises safeguard the health, safety and wellbeing of patients and the public
Read more: Is the GPhC proposing that Superintendents must use AI?
And its proposed new standards for responsible pharmacists are:
- Prioritise patient safety
- Provide the leadership and management needed to ensure the safe and effective operation of the pharmacy
- Make sure, if using authorisation, to authorise responsibly and make clear the lines of
- accountability
- Maintain and strengthen governance to ensure safe and effective delivery of pharmacy services
Read more: PSNI consulting on pharmacist prescriber standards
The regulator said in December that the new drafted rules for responsible pharmacists detail “specific requirements relating to their duty to secure the safe and effective running of a pharmacy business at the premises from which it is carried on”.
They include “the maximum period the responsible pharmacist may be absent from the premises during the pharmacy’s business hours”, proposed as up to two hours, and “the arrangements that must be made if the responsible pharmacist is absent”, it added.
Read more: ‘Confident we can improve’: PSNI fails four regulatory standards
RPS president Professor Claire Anderson said the body’s response to the consultation “reflects the profession’s commitment to proportionate, workable standards that recognise competence and support professional judgement”.
“We want regulations that enable responsible and superintendent pharmacists to deliver the highest standards of care across all settings,” she added.
