Going to the pharmacy

surveyqueenuk

KARO wrote: »

I don't doubt the last bit, but you are simply disagreeing, too, which you have every right to do of course.

I take it you understand the word "perception". Perception doesn't mean statement of truth. It means the way someone is perceived.

Or is it the case that just because YOU PERSONALLY have never thought that way, that what I said MUST be untrue.

Yes dear, but where on earth in post 20 do you mention perception?

If you said "Pharmacists are perceived by some to have a chip on their shoulder..." then that wouldn't be ridiculous at all. Instead, though, you made a sweeping generalisation which is completely unrepresentative of other peoples views.

KARO

surveyqueenuk wrote: »

Yes dear, but where on earth in post 20 do you mention perception?

If you said "Pharmacists are perceived by some to have a chip on their shoulder..." then that wouldn't be ridiculous at all. Instead, though, you made a sweeping generalisation which is completely unrepresentative of other peoples views.

I am not sure why you are calling me dear (??)

Or why you cannot find the word perception in my post..

KARO wrote: »

Pharmacists have always had a chip on their shoulder because of the "not quite bright enough for medical school" perception of them, which has persisted over the years.

Vikipollard

debsy42 wrote: »

Pharmacists have a duty of care to make sure medication is appropriate and safe for patients, doctors and nurses can and do make mistakes that are picked up by pharmacists when dispensing so I think you are being a tad unfair dismissing them.

.

And pharmacists don't make mistakes? What next? The sales assistant checking the pharmacist has checked the doctor/nurse correctly?

I haven't been asked as yet when I collect a prescription - and accepting that I only see one doctor, so he should know if something would clash - but I will politely refuse the offer. Not sharing that detail with a retailer.

surveyqueenuk

KARO wrote: »

I am not sure why you are calling me dear (??)

Or why you cannot find the word perception in my post..

I really should have gone to Specsavers... I hold my hands up to that one, totally in the wrong there. Sorry about that.

There you go though. Pharmacists spend years training to do their jobs. I, who cannot even read a forum post properly, would never talk about someone who had spent all that time at university as "too thick for med school". So it's a massive generalisation to say that everyone percieves them to be this way.

coolcait

KARO wrote: »

Pharmacists have always had a chip on their shoulder because of the "not quite bright enough for medical school" perception of them, which has persisted over the years.


The point the OP is making, is that the questions she and her husband are being asked make them feel embarrassed and uncomfortable, to the point where neither of them want to go into the shop any more. No-one should be subjected to that. It matters not if 1000 other people have these checks done and are glad of them. Everybody is different.


I always say: One size fits all is alright for t-shirts, but it's NOT alright for healthcare.

The bit in bold is definitely a sweeping generalisation, no matter what comes after it.

The supposed 'perception' you mention is not necessarily all that widespread, and is really only relevant to the thread if:

i) the OP herself has that perception of pharmacists. She hasn't mentioned the point either way

and/or

ii) this service has been set up, in pharmacies around the country, by disgruntled pharmacists with a chip on their individual and collective shoulders. There's nothing at all to suggest that this is the case.

The service appears to me to be a good one. It allows people to have one-to-one attention for a reasonable length of time - something which doctors aren't always able to do, given the pressures they also work under.

Apart from the examples already given on this thread, the questions allow the pharmacist to identify any areas where the customer might be inadvertently undermining the effectiveness of their medications. They may be taking them at the wrong time of day, in the wrong order, after food instead of beforehand (or vice versa).

And watching someone demonstrate how they use their inhaler can also identify whether or not they are using it in a way which makes it as effective as possible.

There a lots of reasons for taking up the offer of this service.


And one simple way of not taking it up:

"No thank you. We get full, regular follow-up checks at our doctor's surgery, so we don't need to use this service."

Person_one

Vikipollard wrote: »

And pharmacists don't make mistakes? What next? The sales assistant checking the pharmacist has checked the doctor/nurse correctly?

I haven't been asked as yet when I collect a prescription - and accepting that I only see one doctor, so he should know if something would clash - but I will politely refuse the offer. Not sharing that detail with a retailer.

At the hospital where I work, our fantastic pharmacists do a regular meds check for every patient. This includes elective admissions where they bring their regular stuff in from home. You'd be surprised how many errors they pick up and how many times they have to contact GPs. I know I was! Doctors are only human, nobody is perfect.

When it comes to something as potentially dangerous as powerful drugs, surely having several sets of qualified, knowledgeable people check is a good thing? Sometimes, even nurses or the patients themselves find errors, believe it or not.

HOWMUCH

It's called a MUR ( Medicine User Review) set up by the government in 2011 the Pharmacy completes a form they then send 1 copy to your GP for you medical records and they keep a copy, the other gets them a payment of £28. So it's a nice little earner for the Pharmacy.

coolcait

"a nice little earner" for the pharmacies, perhaps - but also a useful service to the community. For those members of the community who wish to avail themselves of the service, of course.


Maybe that makes the money given to the pharmacies 'remuneration for services rendered to the community'?

chocdonuty

I work in a pharmacy and we too offer this service Medicine use review (MUR) It's a good service in that you have longer than the allotted 7 minutes with the GP and can discuss your medication plus any medical issue easily. and without time restraints.
Unfortunately there is often a target to do a certain number of these per year, 400 for us and we are under a lot of pressure to complete that many. So we will ask anyone who is eligible if they would like this service and also sometimes explain how it works as some people just don't know.
Everyone is free to say no for whatever reason, we can also note in on their record so that next time meds are dispensed we do not ask again if required. Although we do generally know those customers who will never take part in the service.
We never push this service where it isn't wanted and probably will miss our target again this year but we like our customers, there's just no way of hitting it without dragging them into that room forcibly! Our customers are too nice for that, well the majority of them anyway
Personally I'd change pharmacy's if it were me, a simple no thanks should do.

coolcait

chocdonuty wrote: »

...






Personally I'd change pharmacy's if it were me, a simple no thanks should do.

Apologies for chopping your very interesting and informative post.

From what the OP has written so far, she and her husband have yet to use the very simple, and effective, phrase "No thanks, it's not for us".

Instead, they have both - in the past - taken up the offer of the service, and the last time it was offered to the OP she said that she didn't have time. That's giving a different message to the pharmacy staff.

So, the first step, before changing pharmacies, is probably being clearer about the 'No thanks. Not interested' stance.