RPS publishes full response to GPhC revalidation survey

RPS logo

There is a risk of peer discussion becoming “a tick-box exercise that does not deliver assurance or professional development”, the Royal Pharmaceutical Society (RPS) has said in response to the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) consultation on proposed changes to revalidation.

While the Society supports peer discussion “in principle”, it says that this part of the proposed revalidation process should “only be undertaken within a structured format of trained reviewers/assessors… peer reviewers must possess the skills to facilitate a discussion.”

The Society adds that “it is not clear how this [peer discussion] process will be used to identify poorer practitioners”.

The RPS says that it would “strongly recommend that peer review evolves into a formal appraisal that balances challenge with support”.

The RPS also “requests that the GPhC should not inadvertently put in place barriers to completing the revalidation process” for pharmacists working in “increasingly prevalent” portfolio careers and management consultant roles, as well as those currently away from their jobs because of illness or maternity leave.

These pharmacists may experience comparatively greater challenges completing the peer discussion aspect of revalidation.

The response ends with a formal request from the RPS to meet with the GPhC for further discussion on the proposed revalidation framework.

Read the full RPS response to the consultation here.

Last updated
The Pharmaceutical Journal, RPS publishes full response to GPhC revalidation survey;Online:DOI:10.1211/PJ.2017.20203315

You may also be interested in