What's the answer to ensuring adequate staffing levels in pharmacies?
Should the GPhC set a minimum number of staff depending on the prescription volume, service offering and population requirements, perhaps? Or should it be down to employers to set expectations in their pharmacy's SOPs?
Share your thoughts below
Legal view: GPhC should not set an ideal number of pharmacy staff :: C+D (chemistanddruggist.co.uk)
PDA: Pharmacies have 'long way to go' to meet safety targets :: C+D (chemistanddruggist.co.uk)
The pharmacies handling ‘horrendous’ demand on a skeleton staff :: C+D (chemistanddruggist.co.uk)
GPhc waste of space
ALSO BRING BACK THE COMMENTS SECTION AT THE BOTTOM OF THE ARTICLE EDITOR!!
I did a time study on this a while back, and it strangely found that broadly speaking, most pharmacies we looked at were at a "good" level. Of course, there are so many additional factors one can add and consider to make the accuracy of such data better, although I suspect in most places there's a good argument to be made in regards to workflow optimisation, and reasonable time expectations set on patients. You know, the classic, I've just seen the doctor 2 minutes ago, what do you mean it's not ready?
There's a good argument to be made for the three-day turnaround.
Day 1) Typing and Stock Ordering
Day 2) Assembly and Dispensing
Day 3) Accuracy Checking and Collection/Delivery
Staffing levels are specified in the Drug Tariff
To The Editor: Bring back the 'Comments' Tab at the bottom of an article
Suggested staffing levels, which appear to not be based on any kind of evidence-base, are indeed specified Uma, but are they adequate? Are they reasonable? Do they account for modern pharmacy?