Click on the Newsletter Reader's Forum link to access a forum from which you can express your comment or viewpoint on this article.
The author values your input, so please take the time to register your details, and participate in the only free debate on the future of Australian pharmacy.
Registration is free, and required once only, for permanent access.
You do not need to register if you only wish to view comments.

I thought it might be of interest to pharmacists working in the community to know of the initiatives their medical colleagues, working in the community are facing. Firstly, like pharmacy, medical practices are racing against the clock to become 'accredited'.
Pharmacists for the most part know what this means in terms of work and hours put in writing policy and procedure documentation, purchasing new equipment and even redesigning the architecture to carve out a lunch room.
Our GP colleagues are up for the same with the added threat that their PIP (enough to give you the pip!), that is their practice incentive payments, will be withheld from next year if their practice is not accredited.
I suppose in pharmacy terms it would mean that quite a bit of your dispensing fee would be sheared off.
Added to this is a plethora of new Medical Benefits Schedule (MBS) items that are effectively changing the way medical services are delivered for many of a GP's patient cohort.
Annual Health Assessments for elderly patients, Care Planning for patients with chronic disease are now a recognised aspect of everyday practice where the GP is paid for a case conference, with allied health professionals associated with the patient.
Also Domiciliary Medication Management Review (DMMR) is due to start in November - another very new initiative for a GP.
GPs are quite pleased with these initiatives as for the first time in GP land they are actually being paid for what they did anyway.
Does this sound familiar?
Relationships with professionals outside the four walls of the surgery are becoming important for the wellbeing of their patients, and good health outcomes.
At a meeting at our Division last week 30 plus GPs acknowledged that the professional most referred to in the community was the pharmacist.
In the metropolitan area in Melbourne this is many pharmacists as networks exist, where in smaller communities it is likely to be a one to one simple arrangement (where it is hoped no friction exists), and there is mutual respect for each other.
I am privileged in my Quality Use of Medicines (QUM) consultant role in the Division to have won the trust and respect of the GPs as I work to deliver services and education that can make their professional lives easier.
It is essential that in the community local pharmacists and the 'preferred' pharmacist of their patient, as the DMMR instructions state, can also put away petty grievances that may exist, and work cooperatively and professionally. Taking that extra step if need be, to forge this type of relationship.
Going on the response from the meeting and from historical uptake of new initiatives I do not think it will happen very quickly.
My presentation to the meeting on Medication Review raised many questions indicating that this systematic and comprehensive approach is new to many GPs.
This is an initiative for the long haul, and will evolve slowly, but the pace of its development will very much depend on the first experiences.
It is essential that the first foray into DMMR for a GP, pharmacist and patient is as good as it can be, and as positive.
No criticism, no put downs but genuine and helpful recommendations with the realisation that pharmacists have another facet of knowledge of the patient to the GP, and together they can obtain a better health outcome for their patient.

Ends
Back to Article Index
Newsletter Reader's Forum

Previous Article

Next Article

Back to Article Index
Article Archive 2000
Article Archive 2001
Home