The
Contents
§
Aims and
objectives
§
Membership
principles
§
Competencies
§
CMHP Council
Members
Aims and objectives
Missions statement:
The
Aims:
§
To drive the
development and provision of high quality mental health pharmacy services to all service users
§
To establish
accredited pharmacists as recognised expert practitioners in medicines use in mental
health
§
To assure the
competence of accredited specialist mental health pharmacists
Objectives
§
To liase with
other professional bodies, organisations and voluntary groups working in mental health to promote optimal
use of medicines
§
To advise on
appropriate competencies for pharmacy practice and standards for pharmacy services in mental health
§
To set
competencies for pharmacy practitioners in mental health that meet the requirements of
clinical governance and correlate with competencies
set for pharmacists specialising in other areas of practice.
§
To encourage
and support pharmacists in achieving the competencies necessary to practice in mental health
§
To accredit
individual mental health pharmacists as competent practitioners
Membership Principles
A. Basic requirements:
There are two basic requirements for membership of
the
1. Registration as a pharmacist
2. Specialist expertise in mental health pharmacy.
This can be through either:
2a. Five years active involvement in psychiatric care post-registration with
RPSGB or
2b. Three years active involvement in psychiatric care post-registration with
RPSGB, and a postgraduate certificate and diploma in Psychiatric Pharmacy or
other equivalent qualification
Membership
will continue to be open to those pharmacists with at least 5 years experience
in psychiatry until at least 31/12/2007. Any decision to terminate this option
will be made with a minimum of 12 months notice.
B. Membership application:
There are two components to the application for
membership of the
1. Completion and submission of a portfolio
2. A viva voce examination with founders
The specialist accreditation/membership will remain
valid for five years. There will be a CPD commitment and re-accreditation after
five years.
Prospective members need to
complete a portfolio application form and send this to the College Registrar.
They will then be sent 3 identical empty portfolio files which will need to be
completed and returned to the registrar. Following acceptance of an adequate
portfolio the registrar will invite the prospective member for a viva
examination.
Details of the Portfolio and viva are
available:
- Click here for Sample vignettes
- Click here for portfolio
Competencies
The following is the range of competencies
that will be assessed through the provision of a portfolio and through a viva:
1. Professional expertise in drug
therapy in psychiatry/mental health
1a. Demonstrate knowledge of the relevant
pharmaceutical aspects of drug treatment choice
1b.Demonstrate knowledge of pharmacodynamics
1c.Demonstrate knowledge of pharmacokinetics
1d.Demonstrate knowledge of pharmacoeconomics
1e.Demonstrate knowledge of drug interactions
1f.Demonstrate awareness of the principles of prescribing quality
1g.Demonstrate an appreciation of the prescribing issues associated with
special patient groups
1h.Demonstrate the ability to apply knowledge of drug treatments to clinical
situations 1i.Interpret published papers
2. Demonstrate thorough knowledge of
mental illness
2a. Classification (symptoms/description)
2b. Epidemiology
2c. Course and prognosis
2d. Pathology
2e. Biological and psychological theories of mental illness
3. Communication within
multidisciplinary and user forum/fora
3a. Evidence of productive involvement
within a multidisciplinary environment
3b. Medicines information
3c. Experience of productive communication with service users
3d. Demonstrate clear, concise and effective written and oral communication
skills
4. Legislation and politics
4a. Knowledge of
relevant mental health legislation
4b. Demonstrate knowledge of the health policy influencing mental health care
in their own country
5. Service provision and development
5a. Demonstrate a
wide experience of the provision of pharmaceutical services in mental health
5b. Be able to plan local service development to meet changing needs in mental
health care
6. Care
6a. Demonstrate a commitment to patient
care
6b. Show empathy to patients in their approach to provision of services
7. Vision and initiative
7a. Demonstrate
initiative in their work
7b. Show a clear vision for personal and service development in the future of
pharmaceutical mental health services
History of the CMHP
development
Initial proposals
The concept of the CMHP
developed after a UKPPG meeting in
The process aimed to:
- ensure a high standard of pharmaceutical care
in mental health
- be self-regulating - since clinical governance
insists on life-long learning, professional self-regulation, and
- ensure that pharmacists are accountable to
their peer group
UKPPG AGM 1999
At the AGM of the UKPPG on
Friday 8th October at Latimer House, a two-thirds majority of the 119 members
present voted, during a two and a half hour debate, to amend the constitution
of the UKPPG to allow the establishment of a
1. The executive committee of the UKPPG shall to take the steps necessary to
establish the
2. The executive committee of the UKPPG will appoint the founder members of the
3. The UKPPG executive committee will take any actions it deems reasonably
necessary to assist the founder members of the
4 The constitution of the UKPPG will be amended by adding the following
paragraphs:
i. The College of Mental Health Pharmacists is a practice sub-group of the
UKPPG.
ii. The College of Mental Health Pharmacists is managed by its own members. It
is accountable to its own membership on professional issues, but to the UKPPG
in financial matters.
iii. The College of Mental Health Pharmacists has an executive committee of
five members. The officers are: President, Vice-president, and Secretary.
iv. Membership of the
5. The founder members of the
6. The founder members of the
7. Once the the College of Mental Health Pharmacists has reached a membership
of 25 (not including the founders), the founder members shall resign and an
election shall take place to elect the first elected executive committee of the
College.
8. Following their resignation, if they wish to remain members of the
9. If the
Although an open vote for
members to vote in Founders was carried out in 1999, it was decided to re-run
this in January 2000, with formal voting papers. The UKPPG Chairman personally
wrote to all people who received votes in the original ballot. Eight people
eventually stood, with five voted in a Founders. The Founders Board first met
on 28.3.00 (
There was much interest
from others, and the following is part of an article that appeared in the
Pharmaceutical Journal
Delivering professional competence - options for pharmacy
The Pharmaceutical
Journal, 2000, 264,
928-929 (June 17)
By Clive Jackson, MSc, MRPharmS, and Bryan Veitch, PhD, FRPharmS
In this article, the
authors suggested that setting up a faculty system for pharmaceutical
specialisms might demonstrate pharmacy's commitment to meeting the challenge of
delivering professional competence in the NHS and provide other benefits as
well. The full text can be found on the PJ website.
Some points made were:
- the reputations of all the main health care
professions are increasingly suffering from the poor performance of a
minority of their members
- The representative bodies of each health care
profession are currently considering what action needs to be taken in the
light of this evolving, and inherently less comfortable, environment for
their members and if they don't, then the Government will take action
using powers provided recently under the Health Act 1999.
- The RPSGB has been proactively consulting
members on a new regulatory framework to "ensure professional
competence and lifelong learning".
- The days have long gone since the practice of
pharmacy, irrespective of the area in which an individual worked, could be
considered to be broadly similar. So, a single competency framework is
unlikely to cover all the aspects of current practice
- How might be possible to identify a limited set
of "core" competences applicable to the majority of practising
pharmacists, irrespective of the area in which they work?
- In the current climate, society (and,
therefore, the Government) will increasingly require "proof"
that all professionals are appropriately trained, experienced and up to
date for the specific tasks they undertake
- We have little choice but to start addressing,
in a formal way, professional standards through the development of core
and specialist competency frameworks, linked to a robust system of
continuing professional development, life-long learning, reaccreditation
and rigorous self-regulation
- A college/faculty system may be a way forward
- A good example of this process can be seen in
the UK Psychiatric Pharmacy Group (UKPPG) which is being proactive in
creating both a professional and educational structure for its members, as
well as defining the skills necessary to provide high quality
pharmaceutical psychiatric services. In fact, the UKPPG plan is to set up
a stand-alone College of Mental Health Pharmacists by October, 2000, which
will, among other things, set out a competency framework for its members
(see its website: www.ukppg.co.uk).
- Benefits of belonging to a college or faculty
could include visible recognition of membership of a (hopefully)
prestigious, specialist college or faculty (eg, the Royal College of
Psychiatrists or Faculty of Public Health in medicine) with additional
recognition for high level achievement (eg, fellowship, merit awards,
etc), provision of a focus for developing and delivering professional
specialist views and input into (and, therefore, influence on) national
initiatives and policy development, provision of a professional network
for peer support, peer review (and peer pressure - linking into the new
clinical governance agenda), provision of a system for the rapid and
effective dissemination of national and local good practice, plus new
clinical and service developments, accreditation (and, on occasions,
commissioning or delivery or both) of bespoke education and training
courses targeted at the specialism's needs
Clive Jackson is
director of the National Prescribing Centre and Bryan Veitch is the chairman of
the
References:
1. Society starts consultation on new framework for professional regulation. Pharm
J 2000;264:400.
2. Competences for pharmacists working in primary care.
A relatiely low-key launch
at the UKPPG annual conference in October 2000 was made. A consultation
exercise with the members was carried out in May-June 2000, with 15 replies
received. One of the main challenges of setting up the CMHP was that, as it is
a ground-breaking development, there was nothing with which to compare or
contrast, or to copy or adapt. There were different options and ways to try to
achieve our ultimate goal, but the Board were fully focused on developing
something that is (and is seen to be) consistent, realistic, reproducible,
objective and fully assessable.
A copy of the original
discussion document is included below. This was originally circulated to UKPPG
members as a supplement to the UKPPG Bulletin in May 1999 to inform members and
to stimulate discussion. It was, however, subsequently widely circulated and reproduced
(but not by committee members), misread and misinterpreted, and taken as a
final document. This was unfortunate to a large extent, but it certainly
succeeded in stimulating debate.
The
UKPPG discussion paper from May 1999
This paper was prepared by
the UKPPG working party on Clinical Governance, and set out the current
thinking on the subject, the response from the Group, and asked for members
active involvement in the process.
|
Contents:
|
1. Clinical Governance:
What does it mean for Pharmacists?
Carol Paton, Bexley
Commercial companies have
for many years been subject to ‘corporate governance’, which ensures that
directors are responsible to their shareholders for maintaining good standards
of practice, having a clearly defined decision making process and allow open
access to information. In contrast, NHS Trusts have been accountable for their
financial affairs (no pun intended!), but not their main purpose of treating
patients. The NHS white paper ‘The New NHS: Modern, dependable’ changes this by
making Trust Chief Executives accountable for the quality of clinical care
provided within their organisation. In the wake of the
The aim of clinical
governance is to ‘ensure fair access to consistently high quality health care
for all patients’. The National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) and
National Service Frameworks (NSF) will provide guidance on good quality care
(the carrots), while the Centre for Health Improvement (CHImp) will monitor
adherence to the standards set (the stick). One of the first NSFs is in mental
health, an identified NHS priority area. Many will be watching and monitoring
its impact.
Trusts must identify a
senior clinician to take responsibility for the clinical governance agenda (a
huge and complex task) and many have set up clinical governance boards to
further allay the anxieties of the Chief executive. Clinical governance is a 10
year agenda and is not going to disappear. We need to welcome it and use the
opportunities that it provides to improve the quality of care available to
those with mental health problems. Who better than the lead pharmacist in
mental health to take responsibility for the clinical governance agenda in
respect of medicines management across a Trust? Such a person would be
responsible for the quality of pharmaceutical care through a range of
activities including training, drug information multidisciplinary working,
protocol development, audit and error reporting. These are all roles that are
well developed within our profession and we have a proven track record of
delivering. The Crown review of the prescribing and supply of medicines may
extend our role further. We are already ahead of the rest and should aim to
stay there. Clinical governance is an opportunity and we have only ourselves to
blame if we do not seize it.
2. UKPPG Chairman -
David Taylor
UKPPG members will
all be aware of changes in the NHS and the move to clinical governance for all
the professions. The UKPPG welcomes this change, and Committee members have
been working for some time to develop workable and credible proposals to ensure
clinical governance in psychiatric pharmacy. We do not pretend that the proposals
are perfect, but we consider that they do meet the objectives that we set out
to achieve - to ensure a high standard of pharmaceutical care in mental health,
to be self-regulating, and to ensure that pharmacists are accountable to their
peer group.
The proposals set out in
this document are radical, to say the least. They probably represent the most
challenging and progressive changes in psychiatric pharmacy practice in any
developed country. We hope that these proposals will be read with an open mind.
Change is never easy, and one's first reaction is often to reject new ideas.
Remember, though, that the broad aim of these proposals is to improve the drug
treatment of mental illness by ensuring high standards in pharmaceutical care.
Note also that the proposed accreditation scheme is not the view or imposition
of one person, but is the carefully considered vision of every member of the
UKPPG committee.
In a changing NHS, where
professions are being compelled to self-regulate, pharmacists working in psychiatry
cannot sit back and hope no one will notice them. Clinical governance has been
designed to assure the high quality of care throughout the NHS for the ultimate
benefit of patients. We hope, therefore, that these proposals will be seen not
as a threat, but as a rare opportunity.
There will be a
consultation period. We ask all UKPPG members to consider these proposals
carefully. After all, they will influence the direction of psychiatric pharmacy
practice for years to come. We urge members to offer their comments and
opinions, and guarantee that they will all receive the most serious and careful
consideration.
The final proposals will
be presented at this year's AGM, and time has been specifically set aside to
debate the proposals in detail, so all members will have the opportunity to
comment, debate, and vote on the proposals. Above all, we hope that this will
be a fully participative process. That more than anything else will demonstrate
the vitality of the UKPPG, the crucial importance of this issue to our
collective and individual professional futures, and will ensure that the end
result will be the right one for pharmacists working in mental health.
UKPPG Vice Chairman -
Stephen Bazire
We realise that the whole
subject of Clinical Governance and Specialist Accreditation may be a little
overwhelming, if not downright scary, for people who are not familiar with the
current NHS guidance and instructions. Please take the time to read the white
paper summary if you need to learn more.
Clinical Governance is the
concept that binds the existing strands of audit, clinical guidelines, risk
management, standards, quality assurance and practice research. It not only
applies to the professions such as our own, but will also apply to prescribing
and drug use. The one clear thing is that ignoring Clinical Governance is not
an option. The Government has spoken, Chief Executives have been given a clear
timetable and the professions have to either self-regulate or be regulated.
Please read this paper carefully, learn more if you need to, and contribute to
the developments.
The draft proposal
presented to members has been devised over about 100 person hours. My feeling
is that UKPPG members are lucky to have such people as Peter Pratt and John
Donoghue, who have the foresight to see the considerable opportunities (and
threats) posed by clinical governance, and a committee willing to give up (yet
more of) their own time to develop the scheme.
The potential
opportunities afforded by clinical governance for an enduring improvement in
the pharmaceutical care of people with mental health needs are enormous. Let us
grasp these opportunities, for the sake of our service users.
3. Summary of proposals
- The UKPPG introduces a scheme of
"Specialist Accreditation" for mental health pharmacists,
involving a mixture of experience and personal qualities
- This "Specialist Accreditation" is
integral with the principles of Clinical Governance
- The UKPPG changes it’s name to the
- Accredited pharmacists are recognised as full
members of the new group, non-accredited practitioners as associate
members
4. Clinical governance
– what is being proposed?
Diane Booth (
The UKPPG, committee after
lengthy discussion, has concluded that setting standards in psychiatry would
acknowledge those people working with a specialist knowledge. As a professional
body, the UKPPG would be able to raise the standard of care available to these
patients, by recognising those pharmacists providing a specialist service.
Although this would mean that some pharmacists would not qualify for this
accreditation, it would put pressure on employers to insist on a specialist
accredited service, and would lead to a review in the care provided to
patients. Thus Clinical Governance is achieved.
4a. The process for
accreditation
Basic qualification: It will be necessary for all
specialists to share a basic qualification and experience base of at least
three years working with patients suffering from a mental illness. This should
be an active role, at a level which is applicable to the environment the
specialist is working in. e.g. those pharmacists working in a Mental Health
Trust, will be expected to demonstrate a type of active involvement to those
working in the community.
Specialist expertise: There will also be a requirement
to demonstrate a special interest or depth of knowledge in Mental Health. This
could take the form of either further education or research, or a long history
of experience in Mental Health, which would acknowledge the valued expertise of
those pharmacists who may not have had the opportunity to develop academically
in the past.
Portfolio: In order to demonstrate these
skills, a portfolio would need to be submitted which would provide evidence of
involvement, achievements and activity in the pharmacists field. This
information would cover a variety of circumstances, and could provide a strong
support to the application.
Viva: Submission of all this evidence
at a viva would ensure any outstanding issues and problems were resolved.
During this process, communication skills and the ability to apply knowledge in
a variety of situations would be reviewed, in a formal one hour session, and
allow an accreditation panel to assess the skills not confirmed by the
applicants qualifications and portfolio.
The whole accreditation
process would need to be repeated every five years, to ensure continual
personal development. There would be no limit to the number of times someone
could become accredited.
For those pharmacists who
do not demonstrate sufficient evidence of specialising, they will be advised on
the need for further activity, and asked to re-submit their application in
twelve months time. There would be no limit to the number of times someone could
apply to become accredited.
The proposed cost of the
process is around £300, payable on every application for accreditation.
4b. Portfolio contents
The proposed portfolio
contents are:
- Current post
- Current service
- Publications and written work (of any type e.g.
reports, reviews etc)
- Presentations
- Patient services
- Quality measures
- Process of continuous improvement
- Personal:
- Personal development
- Qualifications
- Special interests
- Personal involvement/effectiveness
- Achievements
- Future service plans
- Additional items
- Referees
These sections are
designed to place in context an applicants current work environment, and allow
them to demonstrate written and verbal communication skills, initiative,
ability to apply knowledge or credibility, clinical effectiveness, leadership,
the application of the Principles of Clinical Governance, and anything else
that may support an application. Not all applicants will complete all
sections of the document. These are given as examples of information that would
be considered relevant.
4c. Election of
founders
Clinical Governance
demands maintenance of standards within professions by one’s peers. In line
with this ideal, the UKPPG committee has decided to invite members to choose,
by election, the Founders whom they would see most suited to this role.
At least five founders are
to be elected. These should be pharmacists practising psychiatric pharmacy at a
level that affords them the ability to assess others. They should be recognised
for their integrity, honesty and their prowess in psychiatric pharmacy.
Academic achievements and national recognition are also important
considerations. Any pharmacist working with patients suffering from mental
illnesses should be considered for this role. They do not have to be committee
members, nor of a national profile. Specialism and competence are the important
points.
4d Introduction of the
proposed changes
Currently, various
sub-groups of the UKPPG committee are working on the implementation of these proposals
for accreditation. It is hoped that it will be possible to meet a number of
deadlines.
- A copy of this pamphlet will be sent to each
member in May of this year. All members will be encouraged to make any
comments or criticisms by the deadline, in order that they can be
addressed as soon as possible by the relevant sub-groups
- Voting papers for the election of the founders
will be attached to this pamphlet. All members will be encouraged to vote
regardless of whether they agree with the proposals.
- At the annual AGM in October, all changes to
the constitution will be discussed in full and then voted on. All members
will have an opportunity to be heard, and all opinions will be considered.
- Depending on the result of the vote, the
proposed changes will either be introduced as soon as possible, or will be
taken back to the committee for review.
- If the vote is not carried, the changes will be
reviewed, and re-submitted to the members as soon as possible for
approval.
4e Implementation of
the process
Assuming approval of the
final proposals by the UKPPG members at the AGM in October, a number of steps
will be taken.
- A finalised version of the requirements for
accreditation and a portfolio will be drawn up.
- A brochure will be available for all interested
parties.
- This will be presented to both the
Pharmaceutical Society and the Royal College of Psychiatrists for their
acknowledgement.
- All relevant Trusts and employers will be
provided with information and urged to ensure their pharmacy manager is
accredited.
- Pharmacist managers will be approached with a
view to becoming accredited.
- The founders will be appointed, and the first
accreditations will begin.
Other pharmacists who have
a specialist knowledge will be encouraged to becoming accredited.
5. Questions and
answers on specialist accreditation
Stephen Bazire (
Why is the UKPPG doing
this now, when other groups e.g. Renal Pharmacists Group, are not?
(a) Accreditation and
Clinical Governance are concerned with provable standards in practice,
including mental health and pharmacy.
(b) Other groups are
developing schemes such as this e.g. O.T’s, Physiotherapists, the Scottish
Hospital Pharmacists Vocational Training Scheme etc. In the
(c) Mental health is the
largest speciality within pharmacy, and deserves such a scheme
(d) Mental health is a
priority within current government guidelines
(e) The UKPPG is taking a
lead, and is probably well ahead of most other bodies
(f) The whole object is to
help ensure and facilitate quality pharmaceutical care for people with mental
health problems, not to create unnecessary hoops or obstacles
(g) It would be
unreasonable to rely on the RPSGB to develop specialist schemes such as this
Why has Clinical
Governance come up now?
The NHS Executive
guidelines on Clinical Governance have just been released, and demand systems
such as that proposed. It will take the UKPPG most of the summer to take
account of member’s suggestions and views, fine-tune the accreditation process,
present to the AGM and, if approval is gained, prepare a "marketing"
strategy. To wait until the AGM for the election of founders would be too late.
The election of founders allows the process to proceed before the AGM.
Can the members vote
against the scheme at the AGM?
Yes, they can. That is the
object of the AGM. Members would, however, need to consider:
- that Clinical Governance is now a statutory
requirement for Trusts and action will be needed
- if the final proposals are rejected in October,
there will need to be a credible alternative
- the consequences of not being involved with the
process of "Professional self-regulation". The alternative is
that it would be imposed on us by others, from other professions.
- that reject of an accreditation scheme might be
seen by as a vote of no confidence in ourselves (sic)
We would ask members to
take the numerous opportunities being presented for input into the discussion,
as a negative discussion at the AGM would waste precious time and resources. If
members feel really strongly about the C.G. issue, a Special General Meeting
may be called at any time by written request to the secretary by a minimum of
ten members. It requires 30 days notice to all members.
Why do we need
"Founders"?
Well, you have to start
somewhere! Who were the first driving instructors? Who tutored the first
clinical diplomas and MSc’s?
What qualifies the
Founders to judge others?
You will do. The concept
of a democratic election open to all members is sound and reasonable.
All members’ votes will carry the same weight. "Professional
self-regulation" is specifically stated in the Government Guidelines and
advice on Clinical Governance. All Founder Members will have to qualify in 5
years anyway.
Who will judge the
Founders? Who would dare fail them?
All accredited members
will have been through the portfolio and viva stages, and will know the
standards set by those Founders, and will be able to set a similar standard.
Can ordinary
pharmacists become accredited?
It depends what you mean
by ordinary. If you mean "ordinary" pharmacists practising
competently and providing a quality service, the answer is an emphatic yes. The
scheme, however, is aimed initially at senior pharmacists e.g. those leading
each service. Accreditation of service leaders will imply that the services they
run will be provided on the principles of Clinical Governance. Having said
that, the criteria for each stage are wide and would include virtually all
experienced pharmacists, including e.g. community pharmacists. There is no
specific mention of any particular location of pharmacists, although there is
likely to be a greater demand within Trusts.
How have the
accreditation criteria been devised?
(a) With the aid of
caffeine.
(b) The principles of
Clinical Governance
(c) Flexibility ie the
criteria can be unique in relationship to your particular situation
(d) Principles of Quality
Assurance of clinical services
(e) To encourage higher
standards of leadership and practice
It’s OK for people in
the big "high profile" departments, but what about me?
High profile does not mean
competence. Low profile does not mean a lack of competence. The criteria for
stage 3 include a range of alternatives. The practice portfolio allows the
pharmacist to explain their particular work situation and how they practise within
that, in line with the NHS Executive principles of Clinical Governance. A
single-handed pharmacist can practise to an accreditable level as easily as
someone from a larger department. It is an ideal opportunity, in fact, for
local (sic) and national recognition for someone who might otherwise not
receive it.
Will there be sanctions
for non-accredited pharmacists?
Not from the UKPPG. Chief
Executives, however, will need to ensure a competent service. The UKPPG will
remind Chief Executives of the risks they run in having a pharmacy service led
by a person who is not accredited and thus falls below the standards set by
their peers.
What will happen if I
don’t get accredited?
All Trust Chief Executives
have a statutory responsibility to ensure Clinical Governance, and will want to
be confident about the quality of all services and staff, including pharmacy.
If such a scheme exists, a Chief Executive may wish to know the reasons why the
service leader or other senior employee is not accredited, and does not meet
Clinical Governance standards. In some cases this may stimulate discussion
about resources, training, staffing etc.
Won’t it make
recruitment more difficult?
It is difficult to predict
the likely impact on recruitment. On the positive side, with continued
professional development within a speciality, recognition of this expertise is
more likely, and the view that our speciality is one with known standards will
enhance it. In the
Will there be any
personal benefits if I become accredited?
Apart from a satisfied and
superior feeling, your employability and job security would be enhanced,
regrading appeals would be stronger, and there would be some additional
recognition and kudos from both your peers AND within your Trust or
organisation.
What if I don’t have
the time or resources to become accredited?
To start with, there is no
time limit involved. If e.g. a Trust has a pharmacy service with no accredited
specialist, then it would be the responsibility of the Chief Executive to
ensure the service is lead by an accredited specialist. This might mean making
more resources available to you.
Won’t accreditation
divide the speciality into the "haves" and the "have nots"?
This is not the object of
the exercise. The aim of the scheme is to raise standards of practice of
pharmaceutical care for users of mental health services. There would be those
who were accredited (and competent) and those who were working towards that. A
competent pharmacist is not necessarily a competent mental health pharmacist.
Where can I find out
more about clinical governance?
Suggested reading
includes:
- Clinical Governance: Quality in the new NHS
(Health services Circular), available from Department of Health,
- Pharmacy in Practice 1999, February, 50
- "What clinical governance means",
Smith, Pharmacy in Practice 1998 (December), 479-482.
- "Clinical governance: application to
psychiatry", Oyebode et al, Psych Bulletin 1999, 23, 7-10
This document has been
prepared by the UKPPG committee in order to provide members with as much
information as possible at an early stage. Members are actively encouraged to
help the committee continue to evolve the scheme between now and the AGM. UKPPG
members currently involved include:
David Taylor, Chief Pharmacist, Maudsley
Hospital, Denmark Hill, London SE5 8AZ, Stephen Bazire, Hellesdon
Hospital, Norwich NR6 5BE, John Donoghue, 4, Wrenfield Grove, Liverpool
L17 9QD, Celia Feetam, 62, Park Hill, Moseley, Birmingham B13 8DT, Dr.
David Branford, Director of Pharmacy, Southern Derbyshire Mental Health NHS
Trust, Kingsway Hospital, Derby DE22 3LZ, Morag Martin, Pharmacy,
Gartnavel Royal Hospital, 1055 Great Western Road, Glasgow G12 0XH, Lynn
Haygarth, 23, Wheatley Grove, Ben Rhydding, Ilkley, West Yorkshire LS29
8SA, Alan Pollard, Mental Health Directorate, Newtown Hospital,
Worcester WR5 1JG, Peter Pratt, Chief Pharmacist, Community health
Sheffield, Lightwood House, Lightwood Lane, Sheffield S8 8BG, Diane Booth, Fulbourn
Hospital, Fulbourn, Cambridge CB1 5EF, Gill Hawksworth, Old Bank
Chemist, 54, Old Bank Road, Mirfield, Yorkshire WF14 0JA and Carol Paton,
Chief Pharmacist, Bexley Hospital, Old Bexley Lane, Bexley, Kent DA5 2BW