RPS U-turns to new pro P-med self-selection stance

The Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) “is supportive of the adoption of models that enable the facilitated self-selection of P-meds, where a community pharmacy chooses to implement such models”, it yesterday (July 14) announced.

The membership body stressed that pharmacies operating this model “must meet regulatory standards” and that all staff involved “must be appropriately trained and supported”.

But it added that the model “may not be suitable to operate in all pharmacies”.

“When setting up these services, pharmacy owners, superintendent pharmacists and their teams must consider good practice guidance,” the RPS said.

“The responsible pharmacist must have confidence that the processes in place ensure any identified risks are mitigated or minimised and patient safety is maintained” – and that they are “able to appropriately supervise” P-med sales, it added.

And the “facilitated” self-selection of P-meds “must operate in an environment...[that] assures public and patient safety”, it stressed.

The membership body added that the superintendent pharmacist must ensure that pharmacy team members involved in the model “are trained to the appropriate level and know when to refer patients”.

“Supports innovation”

The RPS statement of support also recommended:

“Ongoing research into the risks and benefits” of the “facilitated” self-selection of P-meds “in real-world practice”
Implementation of “mandatory training for pharmacy teams operating this model”, including the identification and management of risk from P-med self-selection
Adoption of “technological solutions to flag high-risk P-meds, minimise inappropriate sales and support safe and effective care”, independent of the model used

The body also issued new professional guidance, saying that it “supports innovation”, “recognises changes in practice and supports both the pace of change in delivery of healthcare together with those pharmacists and their wider teams delivering it”.

And it said that the findings of its 2024 call for evidence and literature review on the subject are currently being peer-reviewed and will be published once this has been completed.

“These new models have the potential to improve access to P-meds”, but “must retain the professional autonomy of the responsible pharmacist”, it added.

RPS controversy

“The RPS will collaborate with other organisations to support safe implementation of the self-selection of P-meds, including a public campaign to support the role of community pharmacy in self-care,” it said.

But it comes after the RPS came under fire last June for inviting Boots superintendent Clare Nevinson to give a presentation on how the multiple allows self-selection in its pharmacies.

While the membership body told C+D at that time that its policy was that “P-meds should not be available for self-selection”, pharmacists were outraged that it was reevaluating its position.

Following the discussion, the RPS announced that it was “deeply disappointed” by the pharmacy regulator’s decision to permit P-med self-selection, which it said had been done without “wider communication…to the profession, patients and the public”.

It then issued an eight-week call for evidence on the matter last July to help it “consider” its position on the matter.

The Pharmacists’ Defence Association (PDA) called on members to share their views on P-med self-selection in the same month, citing “several concerns” with the royal society’s discussion on the controversial topic.

Fast forward to February of this year and the RPS welcomed a government recommendation for the reclassification of numerous prescription-only medications (POMs) to P-meds.

But less than a week later, the PDA revealed that the vast majority of its members were opposed to making P-meds available for self-selection.