Pharmacist Precribing Powers?

[BustyPharmD]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

This topic recently came up during an all inclusive health care seminar.
Because of recent changes in politics and changing age demographics

Pharmacist in the future might have the power to prescribe medication. Why? Because the work loads for doctors, NP's, PA's are increasing. The number of baby boomers needing medication will increase. And if healthcare for all goes into effect, the surge in medical care will increase along with medication use. Thus, PharmD's are the next best medical professional that can manage and potentially prescribe.

I don't think the profession of pharmacy is ready for this to happen. There is a conflict of interest between dispensing and prescribing. That's why there are pharmD and MD's,DO's,PA's, NP's. It is to ensure checks and balances within our healthcare system correct? So...pharmd's should never get the right to prescribe.

In addition, the pharmacy profession can barely handle cut throat retailers taking over pharmacy reducing quality care. And as a profession, we can't stop any established school from opening a College of Pharmacy despite supply and demand or hurting the quality of education at established pharmacy schools by taking rotations sites and faculty from them. Hmm that doesn't sound professional either.

 

[hornblower]

Massage therapists and chiros are demanding prescribing rights (or as they call it "independence").

Why not pharmacists?

 

[J ROD]

I think with extra training in residency or something PharmDs could prescribe... basic stuff like BP, Diabetes, Cholestrol, etc.

But, I do agree that in the dispensing world, pharmacist are really needed to make sure that the practitioners writing Rxs get it right.

I think the check and balance is great! But, I know as a MD I cant fill my own Rx in the future.

So, as long as some other professional like a pharmacist is there to check, I think it is fine if pharmacist prescribe with training as long as another pharmacist is checking behind them.

 

[spacecowgirl]

Are we talking that the dispensing pharmacist would prescribe? Because then I agree with you. But if you're talking about a pharmacist in a clinic writing an order based on a diagnosis made by a doctor, NP, PA, etc then I think specially-trained pharmacists are qualified to select a drug based on a known diagnosis.

 

[J ROD]

I dont think the OP has the full grasp that PharmDs can prescribe now under the directive of MDs in some places and states.

OP is basically talking about the retail perspective...."clinical" pharmacist I think could do it on an elementary level....but they need to get more experience with doing physicals and diagnosing somewhere in there.

 

[BustyPharmD]

During the seminar, they did not distinguish between clinical or retail. It was directed to pharmacist in general.

 

[PumpkinSmasher]

Specialized setting but a good example of what you are talking about...

http://www.usphs.gov/corpslinks/pharmacy/pharmpac/practices/pcp.html

 

[hornblower]

My future path is clear. I want to set myself apart from the legions of fresh graduates released from dozens of new schools.

Pharm.D -> Pharmacist Clinician/Practitioner -> sub-specialization in colo-rectal cancer screening.

I don't want to just fill bottles all day.

Although most patients are in need of lifestyle and exercise management, weight control, smoking cessation, colo-rectal cancer screening, hypertension management, diabetes management and/or hyperlipidemia management, the scope of practice is very broad and can range from Acanthosis to Gastritis to physical exams to Zoster.

http://www.usphs.gov/corpslinks/pharmacy/pharmpac/practices/pcp.html

 

[meister]

A PharmD should round with the MDs in the morning in order to toss out treatment options. Hopefully this will gain wider acceptance in the future, there are just too many medications for MDs to handle on their own along with juggling an entire floor of patients and ordering tests and getting H&Ps along with everything else.

My future path is clear. I want to set myself apart from the legions of fresh graduates released from dozens of new schools.

Pharm.D -> Pharmacist Clinician/Practitioner -> sub-specialization in colo-rectal cancer screening.

It is extremely difficult at present time to go from PharmD graduate to clinical pharmacist like you're talking about. Good luck with that.

 

[confettiflyer]

And as a profession, we can't stop any established school from opening a College of Pharmacy despite supply and demand or hurting the quality of education at established pharmacy schools by taking rotations sites and faculty from them. Hmm that doesn't sound professional either.

I take issue with your assumption that opening a school and recruiting faculty & rotation sites away from an established school is "unprofessional."

I quite enjoy the head hunting my school went through to get our professors & the fact that some good, in-house rotation sites that went to other schools' students will now go to me. It's why I picked this school.

If you think something as fundamental as competition is "unprofessional," then you're going to be in for quite a surprise when you enter the real world.

 

[Bears683]

My future path is clear. I want to set myself apart from the legions of fresh graduates released from dozens of new schools.

Pharm.D -> Pharmacist Clinician/Practitioner -> sub-specialization in colo-rectal cancer screening.

I don't want to just fill bottles all day.



http://www.usphs.gov/corpslinks/pharmacy/pharmpac/practices/pcp.html

I'm actually curious about this? How does a PharmD work in colorectal screening? Most effective screening for colorectal cancer is a colonoscopy or a sigmoidoscopy which are usually done by the GI people.

 

[hornblower]

I thought the standard procedure was going in up to your elbow?

Oh well, I'm out.

 

[CVSBodyWash]

Are we talking that the dispensing pharmacist would prescribe? Because then I agree with you. But if you're talking about a pharmacist in a clinic writing an order based on a diagnosis made by a doctor, NP, PA, etc then I think specially-trained pharmacists are qualified to select a drug based on a known diagnosis.

I agree with this, and I think it really all comes down to the amount of training that a pharmacist has. I know that we expanded the amount of educational training that a pharmacist has to have to a doctorate, but without expanding the role that a pharmacist has in patient care it's kind of a waste.

Why force me to go to school for 8 years only to double-check the work of someone who didn't study prescription drugs as extensively as I did? Why not just have the most qualified person do it first? Either:

1. train doctors in prescriptions more extensively so they can get it right in the first place
2. create a specialized population of pharmacists with additional training who deal with doctors to determine prescription treatments based off the doctor's diagnosis who do NOT distribute prescriptions
or
3. cut the amount of training down back to a 4-year degree

The first one is fairly unreasonable for obvious reasons, but is there a particular reason the other two couldn't work? #3 worked up until 2000, right? It seriously doesn't make sense to stick me in school for 6-8 years then tell me I can't prescribe. Why increase required credentials without increasing the pharmacist's role?