CPD - consists of 4 cycles: The standards for CPD is to ensure that
pharmacy professionals maintain their knowledge and skills and to
remain upto date with practise. Patients, the public and government
expect that every pharmacy professional maintains their
professional capability throughout their career. Keeping a record of
your CPD enables you to confirm that you are meeting these
expectations. It also helps you to treain and build confidence as a
professional and it will provide evidence that you meet the GPhC
requirements.
CPD framework: At least 3/9 of
the CPD entry must start at
refelction. At least 50% of the
assessable criteria for good
recording practice. If the
outcome have not meet the
GPhC standards, pharmacist
may be asked to carry out extra
activities.
CPD Rules: Set out in a Statutory Instrument (GPhC
(CPD and Consequential Amendements) Rules Order
of Council: 2011 No.1367). and outline the
circumstances in which registrants can be regarded
as having failed to comply with CPD requirements and
the steps that we may take if a registrant fails to
comply with our CPD requirements.
Part 5 of Pharmacy Order empowers the GPhC to regulate training both before
and after registeration through CPD and, through revalidation. These Rules are
made under 43 of the Pharmacy Order, which means failure to comply can mean
appearance before FTP committee.
The 5 principles of CPD standard are: 1) Keep a record
of your CPD that is legible, either electronically online,
on another computer, or as hard copy on paper and in a
format published or approved by GPhC and carrying the
CPD approved logo. 2) Make a minimum of 9 CPD
entries per year which reflect the context and scope of
your practice as a pharmacist or technician. 3) Keep a
record of your CPD that complies with the good practice
criteria for CPD recording. 4) Record how your CPD
has contributed to the quality or development of your
practice using CPD framework. 5) Submit your CPD
record to us on request.
1. CPD
2. WHAT IS REVALIDATION?
The GPhC has defined Revalidation as - "The Process
by which assurance of Continuing FTP of registrants is
provided and in a way which is aimed primarily at
supporting and enhancing professional practice.
Therefore GPhC will implement pharmacist revalidation
through assuring pharmacist. Plan for implementation are
2015.
May explore the
importance of
interdependencies with
registered pharmacy
standards and
inspection visits, to
avoid replicating
activies for system and
registrant level
regulation.
Using different sources of information and
evidence - views of the profession are
essential to inform requirement on suitable
evidence for revalidation, accommodating
flexibilty and choice for different sectors and
using an outcome-based approach. Such
models may help understand what patients
and the public expect, including confidence
in a registrant's professional role and scope
of practice.
Revalidation could help to
support the gathering
information and evidence to
enable registrants to
demonstrate what they have
learnt form their own
practice and the practice of
others, to impact on future
practice.
Forms of assessment:
Self-evaluation, peer review, patient
feedback, appraisal, complaint logs
and testimonials, audits and customer
satisfaction surveys and most
importantly CPD records.
3. WHY THE NEED FOR REVALIDATION?
Some of the main important contributing factors are: 1)
To maintain public confidence in pharmacy profession.
Opinion polling repeatedly shown that the public believe
health professionals are already subject to regular
reviews or assessments of FTP. 2) Bristol Inquiry Report
showed that competence did not always grow with
experience and could diminsh over time and there is no
system to spot the wearing of competence to support
professionals or protect patients. 3) Also the report
showed that waiting for things to go wrong did not proect
patients adequately, and that there was evidence of
suboptimal performance within the medical profession. 4)
Seeking a more flexible, tailored approach to revalidation
is not good enough. The government still expects health
professional regulators (GPhC for pharmacy) to provide
evidence.
The practice of pharmacy is currently undergoing a revolution in
which the clinical expertise of the profession is being given greater
freedom to harness itself to the needs of patients. Increasingly,
pharmacists are no longer constrained by outmoded limits on their
ability to prescribe independently to patients and the prescribing of a
far wider range of effective medicines will become more
commonplace in future. Pharmacy technicians, too, are working more
closely with patients and hence are expected to be the subject of
statutory registration when the new legislation is implemented. As a
profession, pharmacists are entering a new era, in which they will
have much greater scope to apply their high levels of expertise in
direct patient care. With these changes comes the need to ensure
that their regulatory arrangements are in keeping with their increasing
levels of professional responsibility and the accompanying benefits
and risks to patients that that entails. These changes also requ
require strong and effective clinical leadership and support.
Examples: Mid-Staffordshire
NHS Foundation Trust, The
Howard-Shipman case,
Beverly Gail Allitt (nurse who
killed 6 children)
4. How will pharmacists demonstrate their continuing fitness to
practise in the future?
framework for continuing fitness to practise (revalidation) will have 3 main components: 1. Peer review: A
review of the registrant’s work will be conducted by a professional peer and will be based on a registrant’s
scope of practice. The GPhC is proposing that it will accredit partner organisations to run the peer review
process. Wherever possible, peer review will build on existing processes, such as appraisals. 2. CPD review:
The GPhC will evaluate the current CPD scheme and introduce a modified version of it in parallel with the new
framework. The intention is that the new approach to CPD will focus on the relevance of CPD entries to a
registrant’s scope of practice. 3. External performance indicators: The process will involve a review of external
performance measures, which will vary according to the scope of a registrant’s practice. Indicators will be
developed in consultation with the profession.