In addition to reviewing the position statement from ACCP that was posted last week, I would like for you to look at this 2015 vision statement from the Joint Commission of Pharmacy Practitioners. Think about the future of pharmacy practice. Where are we headed? Does it encourage and excite you, or does it honestly make you a bit nervous?
Finally, I would like for you to visit the InstyMeds website and watch a video or two about their machine.
Lets talk about technology and robotics as it concerns our profession. Opportunity or threat?
50 comments:
I believe it is opportunity. Just a few days ago, I heard on the news that drug-related deaths had surpassed deaths related to accidents, which would make it the third most common cause of death behind cardiovascular disease and cancer.
The future of pharmacy is caught up with the future of technology. In the last 50 years the progress of technology has grown exponentially. It seems odd not to have a cellphone today, whereas it was unheard of having one in the 1980s. And those phones came with a suitcase-sized battery. As new technologies become available, it would be foolish not to capitalize on them. Robots for automatic filling. An advanced computer order-entry program that will more comprehensively detect drug-drug and drug-herbal interactions, as well as overdosing/underdosing. Anything that will help decrease the incidence of drug-related health problems in the country.
In nuclear pharmacy, we are about to undergo a huge technological change. A new computer system will be implemented to make our compounding of radiopharmaceuticals more efficient. Technecium-99m is the isotope that is most in demand, and its cost has doubled in recent years. This new system will help us cut down on the amount we use, saving us time, money, and cutting down on the occupational exposure we receive.
The ACCP 2015 vision statement is encouraging to me. The statements regarding how pharmacists will practice and how pharmacists will benefit society are right on par with the foundations of pharmaceutical care.
The mechanization of dispensing, however, makes me a bit nervous. I see the cost and productivity benefits of the technology, but I question the patient's experience as far as not interacting with a pharmacist face to face when receiving new medicine, as is likely the case in an emergency room visit. One example is an elderly patient. Will the InstyMeds machine be as simple and easy for an elderly patient to use as the demonstration made it seem? Another concern is the unlikely event of a dispensing error. I realize the possibility of computer error is less likely than human error, but if a computer error occurs in dispensing, how will that error be known?
Overall, the opportunities of technology and robotics outweighs the threat, but I can't help but picture a scenario where the patient is pulling their hair out in frustration much like calling a customer service number only to be greeted by a recording.
The threat of a machine taking over a pharmacist's job can be further eliminated by the progression of the pharmacist's involvement in the direct care of a patient.
Barclay Driscoll P1
I find the 2015 Vision Statement as very encouraging and does not make me nervous at all. It seems as though pharmacy is moving into more patient centered care and this means that pharmacists have a bigger and more important role to play in the future.
In terms of technology, there are advantages and disadvantages to that. Probably the biggest disadvantage is in relation to the Vision Statement. Having something like InstyMeds would deprive pharmacists of counseling patients on a direct, one on one basis. This is perhaps the biggest fallback since sometimes patients are not sure of instructions on taking medicines.
However, technology also reduces costs from a business perspective and ease of access to a certain extent. Barclay also makes a good point on stating how do you explain errors made by these machines and who is to blame and at what cost?
I have always believed that as long as technology is under our control, we are safe but as soon as technology controls us, then we can be in trouble- this seems like one of those steps. Technology is great, as long as it is applied in the right situation; like Chris mentions- to make processes more efficient.
Much like Barclay, I like the "Future Visions of Pharmacy Practice" for the most part, but I'm always a little nervous when it comes to new technology. I don't think robotics is much of a threat to pharmacists, so much as it is to patients. They mention it contains pain medication, and theft is enough of an issue at a pharmacy as it is, how difficult would it be to steal drugs from a medicine machine? Going on what Barclay said, if a drug is put in a wrong slot multiple patients could get the wrong medication before it is brought to someone's attention. While a pharmacist may overlook the wrong medication in a bottle, chances are it's not going to happen as often as with a misloaded machine. I have never worked in a pharmacy with the automated dispensing machines, but I wonder if anyone else has and if they encountered any errors?
The ACCP 2015 vision statement sounds to me like what we are learning now in our classes as P1 students. The vision encourages and excites me because my personal career vision is in agreement with the statements made by the ACCP.
The robotic dispensing is a bit scary to me. I can see how it could be an opportunity for the future of pharmacy, but I am wary of the problems that could occur if the technology were to have a glitch or if patients did not understand how to use it properly. I can see by watching the demonstration video that very few medications are made available using the InstyMeds machine and that the available medicines are probably on the lowest end of the medication abuse scale, but I can see how easy it would be for a patient to receive the wrong medication and not realize it if it were a new prescription that the patient was unfamiliar with already. I believe that pharmacists could find a way to use this technology to their advantage and I know that there is such robotic technology available at many large hospital pharmacies and advanced community pharmacies that have already benefited the practice.
It cannot be denied that technology is being integrated into the practice of pharmacy and will probably play an even more major role in pharmacy practice in the near future, but I am still wary of the ATM-style pharmacy. That type of technology seems like at least a small threat to me, but I hope that it will challenge us as future pharmacists to want to make ourselves more irreplaceable through our pharmaceutical care. Much of our work can be replaced by machines, but I believe that our personal care for our patients is the most valuable part of what we do and I cannot see that part of our work ever being replaced by machines.
I agree with Barclay. It is exciting to see pharmacy move in this direction because we want to provide more care for our patients. But it does make me a bit nervous. We see the errors computers can make everyday. As exciting as it is to see pharmacy become more technological, what happens when the technology fails?
Ashley Gibson, P1
I think that technology is definitely a threat to us as pharmacists. For a person who has been taking a certain medication for a long time without any issues, why would they need to speak to a pharmacist. It may be much easier for them to use a "vending machine" type of dispensing system. A computer may be preferred by a lot of people.
Because of this, I think we have to make it more well known how important our job is by capitalizing on the things that computers can't do. A computer can't have relationships with its patients and can't completely "understand" when a patient is having an issue.
When it comes to technology, there are things that it will be ablt to do that people will never be able to match. However, in reverse there are things that people offer than technology cannot. These are the things that we should focus on as we move forward.
I would have to agree that it is opportunity for us as a field to evolve and take more of a primary role in healthcare seeing as we are seen as having the most contact with the patients. If we could use robotics to fill more prescriptions then we could spend more time with the patients consulting, reviewing medications and practicing other aspects of pharmaceutical care. As we are learning in class pharmacist who are practicing more pharmaceutical care are leading to a less cost to society to provide healthcare.
I think it is inevitable that pharmacy will become more and more technologically-based in the future. It is scary to think that a machine could possibly take my place by dispensing drugs or drug identification. However, I believe that we should embrace technology as it develops. We cannot sit back and try to resist it because we will then hold the profession back. Instead, we need to embrace the new technology and then capitalize on things that machines will never be able to do for us such as patient-pharmacist interactions, counseling, and education. This way we can advance as a profession by taking advantage of new technology as well as utilizing the other skills we possess as pharmacists.
JUSTIN CRUMP
Not only do I think that the automated dispensing technology is a threat to us as pharmacists, I think it is a threat to patients. I worked with a ScriptPro 200 at my previous job, which contained about 185 medications. It was convenient at times, but a hindrance at other times. Small pills get miscounted, inventory gets off, and if it does not get "reloaded" each day, you must attend to it every time a medication is out.
This decreases the pharmacists' and technicians' ability to attend to patients because the robot is beeping at you every 5 minutes. In most circumstances, it is quicker and more accurate for a technician to manually count.
I feel as if the automated dispensing machine is ridiculous. I hate seeing patients blindly take medication without knowing any sort of information about the drug. This increases the chance that a patient will misuse a medication, and decreases our credibility as health care professionals.
The idea may work for renting DVDs, but it is absolutely inappropriate for the dispensing of medication.
From the 2015 vision I do like where the future is headed and it gives me confidence that no machine is going to take our job. I watched and read about the InstyMeds machine and I cannot help but laugh at it. The idea seems horrible but apparently it is catching on. I cannot see how the machine processes insurance claims successfully. I can see a patient use the machine and be upset with the price and then having a long phone call with the support team only to try to cancel the fill and go some other place. The machine also makes me nervous about those phone calls. Will those pharmacists be outsourced to a foreign country? What if the patient needs more help and just cannot understand? The machine really cuts out that patient interaction that I believe is crucial in the pharmacy.
I feel like technology is pharmacy is extremely beneficial, but on the other hand it can decrease the amount of patient-pharmacists interaction. I do not agree with insurance companies forcing patients to go to mail order. Most of the patients that are on a lot of maintenance medications are older patients that do not like or do not know how to use technology. I do like that the future of pharmacy mission statement because it emphasizes how pharmacy should be moved more to patient care and not just dispensing. I feel like we are headed more toward pharmacy care and away from just popping out pills and getting people to pick up prescriptions. The robots can save time and are pretty accurate. This can lead to a quicker ‘wait time’ and less errors. But to every positive there is a negative. They can be bad because machines do mess up and that can create chaos.
As far as the Future Vision of Pharmacy, I am definitely excited to see where our profession is headed. It excites me to see our profession turn even more towards the patient instead of just the medicines. I believe medication therapy management, educating our patients on certain things such as disease prevention, health improvement, etc should be an aspect of being a pharmacist. On the other topic, technology is a threat and an opportunity. Explaining it as a threat more and more so, people just want to fly through life and the faster it is, the better. So if you can make getting your medicine, like a drive-thru at McDonald's, many people would be turned on to it. On the other side, I believe that pharmaceutical care is impossible to exhibit if it's dispensed through essentially a coke machine. (InstyMeds) I know they have a phone, but many people, myself included, prefer to have a face-to-face conversation about what I am taking and how it could effect me. Showing it as a benefit, pharmacists can use technology to cut down on medication errors. I worked at an independent pharmacy that has a very outdated system which caused a lot of errors, in comparison to where I am doing my IPPE, although they are much slower, because of the technology, the pharmacist has admitted that it decreased medication errors she would have made if she were not to have it.
Casey Young
WUSOP P1
I feel that the robots can defiantly be a threat to pharmacist. They can cause inventory to be inaccurate, over count smaller drugs, and even cause serious health issues if given the wrong drug or wrong dose. I think they pose more room for error rather than helping the pharmacy. Although I think technology has greatly improved our society, I feel that the robots would cause more issues. Technology is always breaking and changing for the better. My question is will we have the funds to keep updating our technology? I have personally never worked with one so I don't know the benefits they actually can have.
Kasey Jackson
Class of 2015
I think that this statement is a positive one in that the statement makes a great point about pharmacuetical care and also the pharmacits being accountable for the therapreutic outcomes for the patient. I believe this will give pharmacists the chance to work with pateints directly to achieve these outcomes. this inturn will build trust for the profession and also recognition in the society.
with regards to the whole robot issue, I believe it will take away that rust aspect as the patients will be dealing directly with these robots and still get that therapeutic outcome . In effect, pharmacists will slowly be taken out of the equation.
Thanks
Jennifer Adjei(P1)
I have to agree with Dr. deHoll on the idea that it would be foolish not to capitalize on the complexity of technology and incorporating it into pharmacy practice. For the most part, I feel at ease with the idea of this robotic pharmaceutical care. I know many of us are scared of being replaced by machines, but I’m not overly concerned about job availability, as the benefits of pharmacy practice are complex and ensure us that we as pharmacists will remain irreplaceable. I feel like the incorporation of technology into practice is only going to supplement pharmaceutical care. Automated dispensing could reach more individuals in need of pharmaceutical care, or appeal to more patients for the sake of convenience. Automated pharmacy can certainly create some jobs, including many technician positions and other experts to staff help centers and perform webcam duties.
The thing we need to hope for is a system where patients often interact with pharmacists and experts while automated services exist. There should always be a set of patients to interact with pharmacists personally, for reasons including the fact that some people will always prefer face-to-face interaction and will avoid excessive use of technology. Machines can certainly provide some form of care, but that doesn’t mean that others won’t seek care from a pharmacist, or that they won’t use automated dispensing while interacting with a pharmacist. Also, only so many medications are/will be available by machine, so we should rest assured knowing that pharmacists themselves will actually distribute some, if not a majority of, medications themselves. A robot can never fully perform all the duties of a pharmacist, and the use of new technologies appears to mean pharmacists will still have a role in patient care, one that may vary slightly from the role we are used to thinking of.
I still wholeheartedly agree with the ACCP’s mission statement. It is good to know that pharmacists still have goals to collaborate, communicate, and pursue pharmaceutical care goals. These ideals should always motivate us in our practice, even when the landscape changes and we have to adjust to the expected rise of technology.
As far as the video go, it makes me upset that in our world today we seem to eliminate as much contact with other human beings as much as possible. Not to knock online courses or distance learning establishment (LOVE you Hendersonville) but that is another example of our world today minimizing the amount of contact we have in person. I think it's great system to expand learning to students in a different place. However, where is the personal contact. You can't possible understand fully how someone is feeling or truly show compassion over the telephone. There's something about having personal contact that makes a difference.
In response to the Future Vision of Pharmacy Practice article, I feel like we are heading in the direction of what we want to see in 2015. We aren't there yet but we are getting really close. One thing that hasn't improve much and should be worked on more is "working cooperatively with practitioners of others disciplines to care for patients."
Leoneisha Williams
P1
I feel like the ACCP 2015 statement is encouraging. I think this goes along great with the idea behind pharmaceutical care because this is moving pharmacist closer to that.
There are always both advantages and disadvantages with technology and to me the advantages of mechanized dispensing outweigh the disadvantages. As long as we use the technology to assist us in our practice rather then relying on it to do our job I believe that this will be a useful tool. Pharmacist should be able to make sure to use the extra time allotted to them by use of a robot to council the patient on the medication they are receiving. This is one aspect of pharmacy that needs to always be done regardless of the situation.
I think that this move will be a great move. The more patient care the better. I also think that since the future of pharmacy is moving at a great speed that we need to keep up. With this being said 2015 is right around the corner. The plan is coming up quickly and I think the sooner the better. Since we all want pharmacy to make sure that we all go in the right direction I think that we need to make sure that we all help out in what ways that we can to achieve maximum potential for this proposed 2015 plan. The future of pharmacy is going to be pharmacy care therefore we might as well start practicing it now rather than wait til 2015.
The vision statement set forth by the ACCP is very encouraging. It seems that pharmacists are stepping up and wanting to provide MTM and more pharmaceutical care to patients.
The InstyMeds idea raises a few questions. We can't assume that machines are perfect and will dispense the right drug or right amounts 100% of the time. How will the machine be able to verify prescriptions and fix possible errors in prescriptions that physicians could make? How would patients receive counseling on their medications? According to a few sources that I checked, senior citizens account for over 30 percent of all drug prescriptions. Most senior citizens find technology and touch screen devices difficult to use. The InstyMeds is not like a Redbox that has a set quantity of each movie and people return them a day later. The machine would constantly have to be refilled. Also if they are set up like an ATM, what is to keep people from stealing them much like they steal ATM machines?
While I think that InstyMeds could be a help to pharmacists in dispensing medications, there are certain drawbacks to it. I think that technology should be embraced, but also that there are going to be kinks in the system that need to be worked out. After all, personal pharmaceutical care cannot be replaced by a machine.
Tyler Adcock
P1
I think that technology has a potential to take a few jobs from pharmacist if we do not step up and show society our value. If we are looked at as a robot that just dispenses medication to patients, then society will accept a robot instead of a pharmacist to provide needed prescriptions. What types of things do we as current and future pharmacist need to do in order to show patients they need more than a robot to get their medication?
-Caityn Harris P1
I believe this statement is a very positve one. It shows that indeed pharmacist are ready to move to the next level. having the patient care focus will definitely enhance how the public views our role as pharmacist. even more important roles in the future csnnot be overemphasized.
With regards to the robots, I do see how it will free up time for the pharmacists to be able to practise more pharmacuetical care.However, my only worry is how impersonal these robots are. Not to talk of the fact that this will have the possibity of rendering pharmacists jobless.It is a scary thought however a possiblity. In this era of technological developments anything is possible.
Jennifer Adjei (P1)
I find the ACCP 2015 vision statement encouraging in the sense that it pushes for pharmacists to become more involved in pharmaceutical care. It calls for a more patient focused environment and therefore increases the value of pharmacists in the healthcare team. It highlights the crucial roles that pharmacists play in healthcare.
Though I agree that technology is an innovative part of the growing field of pharmacy, I do see some problem with the medication “vending machine”. But my problem is not with the idea that these machines will take jobs away, my problem is more of a safety issue. Just like ATMs did not replace bank employees, I do not believe these machines will take away any pharmacy jobs. However, the InstyMeds robotics will eventually make a life-threatening mistake and how the healthcare technological experts respond will be a tell-tale sign of the direction this technology is headed towards.
Kyle Crisco, P1
Class of 2015
The 2015 vision statement is encouraging to me because it shows how pharmacy is really trying to incorporate pharmaceutical care and medication therapy management. It really shows me that pharmacy is trying to get away from the idea that pharmacists only dispense medications and show the public that we can play a major role in patients healthcare.
I think that technology helping the dispensing part of pharmacy is a great opportunity. Machines like the InstyMed could help pharmacists break off from standing in a pharmacy counting pills and dispensing for a majority of their time. It gives pharmacists a huge window of opportunity to spend their time with new possibilities like medication therapy management.
The less time pharmacists spend checking and dispensing medications, the more time they can be working with other healthcare providers or directly with the patients.
For the mentors that work in a community setting, do you see technology as an opportunity to help free up more of your time from dispensing and work more with healthcare providers and patients?
Nathan Batchelder, P1
The future of pharmacy makes me a bit nervous mainly because of things that I have heard from current pharmacists. I have heard comments from several pharmacists that it is difficult to find jobs. This makes me worry that when I graduate I will not be able to work in a position that I want because there will not be a job available for me. I am excited that pharmacy seems to be heading in the direction of increasing the amount of pharmaceutical care that a pharmacist provides but I don't think this will make that many new jobs available once I graduate.
I think insty meds has a high potential for disaster. Medicine should not be dispensed like candy or soda in a vending machine. I can see places like Kaiser taking advantage of insty meds to cut costs. That will reduce their quality of patient care even lower than it already is.
Technology is just like any other tool. The right tool needs to be selected to do the right job. We need to embrace the best technological advances that fit with the 2015 vision for pharmacy. Instymeds does not fit this vision. Technology that helps reduce error and increases patient contact does.
Greg Thompson, P1
I really like where the future of pharmacy practice seems to be going. The increased collaboration with physicians and other practitioners will further help pharmacists truly become the most trust and reliable resource regarding medications. I am interested in working in a more clinical setting so the increase in managing medication therapy will open more doors for clinical pharmacists. Although it is exciting to think that pharmacists are having a greater role in patient care, we will also be accountable for the patient’s therapeutic outcomes. This is a great responsibility to take on as pharmacists and can be a little intimidating, but I have faith that our education and residency experience will adequately prepare us for the future of pharmacy.
As for the InstyMeds machine, I really do not feel comfortable with this type of dispensing system. It completely takes away the role of the pharmacist and technician and could greatly reduce job availabilities for both. It does not offer the pharmaceutical care that we have been learning about. Some patients may not be willing to use the phone on the machine and may walk away without proper counseling. This type of machine may be convenient for some patients who are getting simple prescriptions, but in the world of pharmacy, simplicity and convenience can be outweighed by safety and care of the patient.
I find that increasing technology is both an opportunity and a threat. If a robot is used to increase the speed accuracy of filling a prescription then this is a positive result. However, I still believe that a pharmacist needs to effectively counsel patients on how to properly take their medications and also to review the patient’s record to make sure there are no conflicting drugs. Also, I feel that pharmacists will always be needed to assess and make sure that the patients are not taking any unnecessary medications which could be potentially harmful and/or costly.
Andy Willis P-1
The future of pharmacy does seem to be a bright one; finally the field is recognized. What I noticed about the vision statement was how much responsibility was to be placed on a pharmacist. When held accountable for so much patient care, the increased use to technology has to follow, whether it is unsettling or not. There's only so much a person can do without needing help. If we really want to implement that much pharmaceutical care, we may need to go so far as to have robots to dispense.
Morgan Bourne, P1
I believe that having technology in the pharmacy can have both positive and negative effects on our future. I believe that it can speed up some processes that would otherwise take pharmacists and techs more time to do. I also believe that it can be an accurate way of dispensing medications. While I believe that dispensing is a right that should belong to pharmacists, I also believe that pharmacists are trying to move into an age of patient centered care. I think that the technology will free up some time for the pharmacists to focus on the patient care aspect of pharmacy. I do not think that we should be threatened by technology, because it can make our job easier in the end.
I think that the vision statement is a step forawrd in the right direction for pharmacists everywhere. However, I do not think that the automated dispensing robotic is. I just do not think that having a computer fill your prescription is the smartest and safest thing to do. The only problem is that this is where technology is going. I personally do not like it, but if it means saving the buisnesses money in the long run, they will do it. Technology is always moving forward and there is nothing we can do to stop it. We should try and accept it that this is the future wheather we like it or not. I still hope that there will be patient pharmacist interaction but people just want to get their medication and leave and not want to talk to pharmacists. I hope that if this is where pharmacy is going that it ends up being the right call.
Matt Nettesheim P1
Technology is constantly changing and just like any other career field, pharmacy is not immune to its effects. I believe that pharmacists should embrace changing technology in future practice, but always make sure to keep direct patient care a high priority. Technology that threatens the vital interaction between patients and pharmacists should be rejected. On the topic of the InstyMeds machines, I do not think a machine can be trusted to lead patients through the entire dispensing process. In addition, if a customer has a question it is a lot more difficult to get answers when a pharmacist is not present. Patients may be less likely to ask important questions regarding medications/health care and this may lead to increased medication errors, such as taking medicine wrong. The need to counsel is of high priority in the pharmacy profession. Our country is in a state of economic downfall currently and the last thing that should be done is to take away jobs, in this case for pharmacists and pharmacy technicians.
Barbara Santevecchi,P1
The ACCP vision statement says that pharmacists will be the health care professionals responsible for providing patient care that ensures optimal medication therapy outcomes. How can pharmacists do this then, without ever seeing a patient. According to one of the videos 60-70% of patients from that ambulatory care clinic got there medications through instymeds. From doctor to machine to patient. The hassle of driving a mile and a half up the road(approximately three or four minutes) as the newscaster said, would just be too much for an ailing patient.
It seems to me that the instymeds machine and the ACCP vision statement are in direct contrast to each other. While there are times when a patient does not need to consult with a patient about their medication, do we really want to be training people to never seek advice on their medications? We can not be the most trusted and accessible source of medication when all a patient has to do is scan a bar code and pop, out comes their prescription. I may have a neo-luddite view on this subject, but the reality is, machines are taking over, and should we really be ok with it just for the sake of a couple minutes saved time?
Kevin Kulik
I see the technology as a good thing to increase productivity, but this will inevitably cause loss of jobs to pharmacists because there will only be a need for 1 pharmacist instead of 3. Look at the automotive or textile industry...when it became mechanized many lost their jobs. So yes it will help with safety by looking at what medications that a patient is taking and prevent issues. If this happens though we will lose our community pharmacy jobs and most likely any job that deals with dispensing. The video shows the machines doing the work and there will be a sharp decline in the job outlook for pharmacists. So we better specialize and come up with other methods of keeping the pharmacy profession alive, because this will become alot more prevalent.
John K.
P1 Student
I think the vision for the future of pharmacy is extremely encouraging. Anything that describes the future of pharmacy as something that is going to be broadened is something that I get excited about. It doesn’t make me nervous in the least. I also believe that we need to take advantage of technologic progressions of any kind. We will never reach a point in which technology could make human pharmacists obsolete, the only thing that technological advancements have the potential to do is to make the future of pharmacy more efficient.
The future of pharmacy in my opinion is still extremely bright as an entire profession. However, with this progression we will see a reduction in certain position that pharmacist currently hold (i.e. purely dispensing). On the other hand there is a growth in medication therapy management and other services that cannot be easily replaced by machines such as instymeds.
Parth Thakkar P1
I think the ACCP 2015 vision statement is a great opportunity that opens a door for pharmacists to be involved in a direct patient care. I'm actually excited about it because I feel like the profession is heading on the right direction. As a student pharmacist I want to be involved more in pharmaceutical care than dispensing and this vision will allow me to do that.
However, I'm very concerned about the InstyMeds where you get your prescription from a machine. I think this whole idea is a threat to the profession in many ways. One, if a community pharmacy or hospital pharmacy starts applying this ATM machines, they don't need as much pharmacists as they do without the ATM machines. They actually need more pharmacy technicians in order to answer some questions related to patient insurance, payments, technical difficulties and so forth. So the pharmacist is there if the patient have some drug related questions and in most cases patients don't really ask questions until they face a problem. Second, this idea of vending machine seems like it's a complete opposite of vision 2015. Pharmacists or student pharmacists want the profession to move forward in terms of patient care, pharmaceutical care as well as MTM. But these machines will completely eliminate that opportunity and we basically are there like a customer service rep to answer questions over the phone. And even then, it'll be very difficult to show patients how to use certain medications like inhalers, and most probably by the time we're done explaining the patient is so frustrated because they didn't understand what we were saying.
Well the InstyMeds idea hopefully will open our eyes and try work hard in terms of pharmaceutical care so that pharmacists can be irreplaceable regardless of any technology.
Pharmacy is moving in a very positive direction with patients being the center of our focus. Personally, it really excites me to see that the 2015 Vision Statement falls perfectly with how I would like to practice pharmacy upon graduation. The profession is taking a lead from out of the shadows and strongly stating that we can "manage medication therapy and will be accountable for patients' therapeutic outcomes." I hope to see this vision accomplished by 2015 because it will bring our profession to light.
I am excited about the increased scope of practice and responsibility that is coming into pharmacists jobs. However I am nervous about job availability for when we graduate. These new changes to the industry could significantly reduce the need for so many pharmacists, add that to the increased size of graduating class from pharmacy schools and our industry could be headed the way or the law degree - where there are very limited jobs for new graduates. It will be important for students to make themselves marketable and able to perform all of these new responsibilities as they graduate to ensure a place in the changing marketplace.
I think one of the comments that struck me the most was Leoneisha's mentioning how our society today tends to limit human interaction. It is far more disturbing to me that patients would be comfortable using a drug-ATM and having a possible phone consult than actually discussing there medication with a specialist. I do see where the machines could be useful however (dispensing small pre-op or post-op meds in the facility, etc.)and I do think that the technological innovation of our field is an undeniable reality that actually will usually benefit us as a profession.
Jonathan Graham P1
I actually am really looking forward to the future of pharmacy. Medicine dispensing machines allows for fewer errors to be made by pharmacy technicians, meaning less potential blame and law suits on pharmacists, and allows more time for the pharmacists to consult with patients about the drugs that they are taking and medical histories. This takes a load off of physicians which will ultimately make the health care system flow a lot more smoothly. On another note, these dispensing machines will demonstrate to the public that the misconception of "all pharmacists do is dispense medication" is false. Pharmacists will play a much greater role in the health care system, and its hard to say how much greater of a role we will play in the next 50 years, but it is my opinion that it is open for us to make that decision ourselves, as long as we remain active in molding our future, and not let other health care professions define our future role in the system.
I believe that technology presents new opportunities for us as future pharmacists in many ways. Most of the time, the customer is just wanting to get in and out of the pharmacy with as little interaction as possible. Their main point is to get the drug and leave. This is where technology aids in the pace at which we can dispense medications, such as robots and other automated machines. Although robots and drug atm machines can make mistakes, it would aid in the delivery of drugs to patients who may have made an ER visit and need a short supply of drugs, such as antibiotics. Another way that technology is beneficial is for research of new drugs and finding cures for some diseases. The future of pharmacy appears to be unending with unlimited opportunities for new drugs and better ways to improve patient care and health. However, I do not believe that technology will completely replace pharmacists because there will always be patients that have questions or want that one on one attention. Hopefully the future of pharmacy can use technology to its advantage and improve the health care field
I feel like technology will help pharmacy in the future. Back home, I work in a pharmacy that has to have a robot, the volume of the store just demands it. Without it the production level would decline, thus hurting the overall sales, and customer satisfaction. I do not agree with the whole patient "do-it-yourself" approach, I think that the robot needs to be heavily monitored by the pharmacist to prevent mistakes that a computer can miss just by personal diagnosis's.
The ACCP 2015 vision, in my opinion, is moving pharmacy in the right direction. It will eventually lead to better patient care and understanding. What is worrisome is the fact that people may want to replace us with machines. The problem that most people have with this is what if the machine makes a mistake. That may be true but what about from the doctor's point of view. The doctor may accidentally prescribe the wrong medicine or the wrong strength of medicine. Without the pharmacist to check the prescription, the patient may take the wrong thing not because the machine made a mistake but because the doctor made a mistake. So I think that the pharmacist will always be needed no matter how technologically advanced we get.
I feel like InstyMeds is a great idea, and therefore we should fear it because the fact is that it will take some pharmacist jobs. Someone last week asked if we, personally, would feel comfortable getting medicine out of a machine. My answer is "Yes" and I think that the majority of the population would agree. The waiting and inconvenience of going to a pharmacy deters some patients to such an extent that they may not fill their prescriptions. This system of no waiting actually provides patients better service (even though they do not have face to face contact with their pharmacist) because they can receive their medicine right away. The faster they have their medicine, the faster they feel better, and the better their healthcare experience is. These machines are accurate...more accurate than human filling, and chance of robbery is no greater than having a fully stocked pharmacy. Machines will not replace pharmacy entirely, so patients will have the option to go see their pharmacist if they wish. IntsyMeds is a great option for some patients, and for our own job security we should hope that it does not get out of control.
Kim Tooker
P1
I feel like this technology is not a threat, but I feel like it is not the best idea. No patient is going to stand there and call a pharmacist on that phone to ask them medication questions. Therefore, many patients will most likely go without counseling which could cause problems. I think it is better to have multiple people in a pharmacy check the prescriptions and offer directions, comments, and concerns to the patients even if it is a little bit out of the way for them to come into the pharmacy and wait.
Patients would be able to benefit from Medication Therapy Management .MTM would help to achieve desired health outcomes and increase quality of life. Each patient’s medications would be individually assessed so that there won’t be any issues of taking or receiving wrong drugs. MTM would help to assure that patients are taking right amount of correct drugs, and not taking too much or too less of the correct drugs. Potential Drug therapy problems such as therapeutic duplications, drug interactions, misuse and abuse can be minimized. Drug related needs such as indications, effectiveness, safety and patient compliance can be monitored easily while working with the medical team professionals.MTM is the solution for many drug related problems and cost- effectiveness of medication therapy. Increase use of technology is inevitable in the future with demand of better health services. Automated dispensing robots would help to dispense medication in faster and effective way. I think technology and robotics would help pharmacists to provide better pharmaceutical care. Pharmacists could use automated dispensing robots to dispense medications and have opportunity counsel patients. I am really positive about where we are headed in the future of pharmacy practice .Robots would be pharmacists’ partners in providing quality health services.
The future of pharmacy is debatable. There are always two sides to every argument. Many believe that the Pharm.D field is becoming too saturated and future pharmacist will not be able to find jobs readily available. Others believe that the role of the pharmacist will end as well. Vending machines will replace pharmacies, and pharmacists will work as telephone operators counseling patients from 100 miles away or by the internet. I don’t believe this will be the truth any time soon. Pharmacy is much a position that involves open communication. Many citizens are becoming older as well as new diseases and syndromes are being diagnosed. Pharmacists are the experts in medications. We need to be there not only for dispensing the correct medication, but also for counseling and monitoring and overall pharmaceutical care. The job market cycles every year. There will be times that pharmacists will be saturated and other times that pharmacists will be in demand. I truly believe that the pharmacist profession is here to stay. It is ever changing and evolving and it will adapt to the current situation. If I did not strong feel this way about pharmacy, I would not be studying pharmacy.
Post a Comment