|
At last pharmacists can be remunerated for application of their
intellectual input into patient care for something other than
the mechanics of dispensing.
A breakthrough of major proportion, or is it?
"At last", I thought, "recognition that pharmacists
have something important to offer in the field of health care"
then I read on.
MAS is very restricted in the areas where it can be offered and
is only available through one private health insurer which in
my state covers about one family per pharmacy!
MAS is unlikely to have a big impact in Western Australia at present
but it is a start.
Let the profession build on this and make every attempt to see
that it works.
The public must be encouraged to use the service at every opportunity
(even if it means nailing feet to the floor to keep the customer
from rushing off!!!).
Seriously,
pharmacy must market this service effectively if it hopes to overcome
the long held opinion that pharmacists' advice has no monetary
value.
We have been giving advice and education away free for so long
that it will take a quantum leap in public perception to acknowledge
that it has worth.
I now wait with bated breath to see the response to this initiative
in the medical literature.
Doctors have long held the belief that they, and only they, have
the right to advise patients on health matters, even if it relates
to medications, where pharmacists are recognised as being the
experts.
Defence of territory seems to bring out the worst in all professions.
Pharmacy must, in this case, fight strongly for the right to be
paid for professional input.
It is a fight we must win if we are to progress beyond being mere
technicians.
So, all you pharmacists with multitudes of MBF members, go for
it so that members of other health funds will pressure them to
incorporate MAS into their benefits.
Pharmacy
has the knowledge and expertise to make MAS work.
New graduates can be a wonderful resource for all us "oldies"
in these matters and their training and enthusiasm should be utilised.
These kids are, in most cases, very good and their ability to
impart training and education to customers continues to amaze
me.
I might just see the bright ones as my offspring are both in the
top 1 or 2% of their year but I don't think so.
Please, use them effectively or I can see another avenue for pharmacy's
professional advancement being closed to us.
I have written previously that the argument "I don't have
the time or resources for HMR" is not a valid excuse for
not trying and this applies just as much to the MAS concept.
Use it or lose it!
On
another issue, I have been reading with interest the furore in
Germany following the advice to consumers from one provincial
pharmacy funder that they should, in the interests of saving money,
obtain their medications from a Dutch internet pharmacy.
I look forward with interest to see if the day ever comes when
Australians will be advised to get their scripts dispensed by
a New Zealand internet pharmacy.
All in the cause of "saving the PBS".
You may have noticed on one of the current affairs programmes
someone berating greedy pharmacists for causing the PBS costs
to blow out!
"Don't you see, it is the fault of pharmacists (who don't
determine what drugs are to be prescribed, what quantity or what
cost price applies) that the PBS costs have risen by 20% in the
last year?
Something should be done to stop them."
Get
ready folks, another attack on our profession appears imminent,
especially as we will be at the front line when, or if, the new
patient contributions come into effect.
Rotten pharmacists "increasing their dispensing fee"
is a comment that is not unlikely to be heard in the near future.
All is not doom and gloom however, as I finally saw in a letter
to the editor someone mentioning the extra 200,000 new concession
card holders created in the 2001 budget.
Maybe, just maybe, this might have something to do with the cost
increase in the PBS.
Back
to Front Page
|
.jpg)
KEN
STAFFORD