~mr®iTE 138~fodHrptWIEdtiIKt ftt;ttlr9-13, 1991
APhA House of Delegates to
Address Pharmacists' Concerns From biotechnology to endorsement of APhA:s "Mission for Pharmacy," the House ofDe legates will consider a full range of issues during the 1991 Annual Meeting. by Sara Martin
P
harmacists' role in emerging technologies, earning a PharmD degree through nontraditional education, and certifying pharmacy technicians are among the timely and intriguing issues to be discussed by the APhA House of Delegates during the APhA Annual Meeting, March 9-13,1991, in New Orleans. APhA's four policy committees educational, public, professional, and scientific affairs - met in September 1990 to discuss issues that will be presented to the 1991 APhA House of Delegates, the largest and most representative democratic body in American pharmacy. The committees, which include pharmacists representing all segments of the profession, make recommendations that the House votes to adopt, revise, reject, or refer back to policy committee. The 1990-91 policy committees recommended 28 policies. In addition to addressing biotechnology, the PharmD degree, and pharmacy technicians, the proposed policies focus on pharmacist-patient communication, updating state pharmacy practice acts, a national pharmacy practice act and licensure, recruitment of minorities into the profession, and pharmacist involvement in therapeutic evaluation.
Preparing for Emerging Technologies Recognizing the new generation of medications and devices being produced through biotechnology, the
APhA Board of Trustees asked the 1990 policy committees to examine emerging technology and recommend Association policies as needed. The study by the policy committees resulted in eight proposed policies on the subject. Over the past decade, biotechnology has created a host of revolutionary treatments such as human insulin, human growth hormones, and erythropoietin. In the near future, researchers anticipate that biotechnology will lead to the development of monoclonal antibodies to boost the body's defenses, vaccines to help eliminate fatal diseases, and treatments to replace genes that warn of future disease. But while biotechnology products are usually designed to function as traditional drug therapies - to protect against, treat, or improve condi tions or diseases - these products are different in stability, metabolism, administration, absorption, and toxicity. They are also able to treat conditions previously not treatable by current therapies. Because of these differences, pharmacists need specialized training in biotechnological entities. The APhA House of Delegates first recognized this need in 1988 when it adopted a policy stressing the "urgent need" to educate and train pharmacists and pharmacy students in the therapeutic and diagnostic use of pharmaceutical biotechnology products. In examining the issue this year, the 1990-91 committees on scientific, public, and professional affairs reaffirmed the need to develop educational materials to help keep phar-
American Pharmacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991/87
macists current with biotechnological therapies and suggested other areas that the Association should address. The Professional Affairs Policy Committee expanded its recommendations to all emerging technologies, including such areas of research as robotics and computers. One concern identified by the Scientific Affairs Policy Committee is the need to ensure that pharmacists maintain their right to dispense biotechnology products. According to the committee report, ''There has been evidence that some manufacturers of biotechnologybased products and certain policies of governmental agencies seek to exclude pharmacy from its traditional role in the drug distribution and monitoring system." Citing the examples of radiopharmaceuticals, Clozaril (clozapine), and human growth hormones - all instances of therapies for which pharmacists may be excluded from the distribution loop - the committee asserts that pharmacy "must take whatever action is required to assure the central role of the pharmacists in dispensing, counseling, and monitoring all drug products, devices, and associated services." The committee recommends that the APhA House of Delegates adopt two policies: • A policy confirming the pharmacist's traditional role of ensuring optimal therapeutic outcomes for all medications, including biotechnologyproduced products.
• A policy stating that APhA "strongly opposes programs and policies by manufacturers, gov19
ernmental agencies, and health groups that cireumvent the pharmacist's authority and responsibility to counsel patients regarding biotechnology-based products, dispense those products, and monitor their therapeutic outcome." The committee also recognized the social and ethical concerns regarding biotechnology products. Because biotechnology products are so expensive and can save lives, the committee believes it is necessary to establish guidelines on who will receive these products, who will pay for them, and how they should be used. To address these concerns, the committee recommends that the APhA House adopt two policies: • A policy that encourages the development of materials to help pharmacists address ethical issues associated with biotechnology products. • A policy that encourages the development of materials to help phannacists counsel patients on the ethical issues associated with biotechnology products. The Public Affairs Policy Committee did not feel it had sufficient background and expertise to identifY relevant public policy issues. However, the committee recognized the need to identify policy related to biotechnology issues and recommended that APhA establish a task force on biotechnology and emerging technologies to identify biotechnology issues to be addressed by future policy committees and, subsequently, by the APhA House of Delegates.
Attaining a PharmD Prompted by the American Council on Pharmaceutical Education's (ACPE) statement of intent to accredit only doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) programs by the year 2000, the APhA Educational Affairs Policy Committee reviewed issues surrounding the PharmD degree. APhA endorsed the PharmD as the profession's sole entry-level degree in pharmacy in 1977. However, only a fraction of practitioners currently have PharmD degrees. As a result, if the ACPE statement is adopted, there will be additional pressure to provide opportunities for obtaining the PharmD degree by practitioners and students.
20
To address this concern, the Educational Affairs Policy Committee is recommending three policies: • APhA should encourage schools and colleges of pharmacy to consider offering nontraditional* postbaccalaureate PharmD degree programs. • Nontraditional programs should produce graduates who are as competent as those students who attain a PharmD degree in traditional programs. • APhA should commission a study to assess the feasibility of a PharmD equivalency certificate program for pharmacists currently holding baccalaureates in pharmacy.
Certifying Pharmacy Technicians The Professional Affairs Policy Committee addressed another potentially controversial issue - the certification of pharmacy technicians. The committee noted that APhA policy adopted in 1988 is somewhat negative and potentially confusing. The policy reads: APhA opposes the licensure, registration, or certification of pharmacy technicians by statute or regulation. The committee believes the profession should fully embrace pharmacy technicians and encourage their development. However, the committee - and most of the pharmacy profession - opposes mandatory licensure or certification of pharmacy technicians. Instead, the committee recommends and encourages voluntary certification programs that are controlled by pharmacy. In addition to reaffirming the 1988 policy, the committee recommends the House add to its policies on pharmacy technicians that: • APhA supports the voluntary certification of pharmacy technicians by the pharmacy profession. • APhA supports the voluntary accreditation of pharmacy technician training programs by the pharmacy profession.
* "Nontraditional" refers to those programs that offer PharmD degrees to practitioners who fulfill the requirements for the degree in ways other than full-time, on-campus study and clinical training. There are five such programs currently in operation.
Recruiting Minorities The Educational Affairs Policy Committee revisited an issue that has been discussed by the APhA House of Delegates several times in previous years - the recruitment of minorities into pharmacy schools. The number of minorities in pharmacy continues to lag behind the number of whites in the profession. The committee cited several reasons for this problem: • The lack of minority role models in pharmacy and the higher profile in minority communities of medicine, nursing, and dentistry as health career paths. • The high cost of education in a health profession. • The scarcity of scholarship programs. • Ignorance about pharmacy as a profession. • The image of the pharmacist, particularly in the Hispanic community, as "a drug-keeper, a businessman whose drugs are overpriced ... usually not an active participant in a community's health care." To address these concerns, the committee recommends that the House adopt the following policies that encourage APhA to: • Support a vigorous, long-term program to recruit minority students into the pharmacy profession. • Support development and regular updating of comprehensive recruitment materials for minorities that address such issues as pharmacy career opportunities, financial aid, and educational prerequisites, and that highlight professional minority role models. • Support national, state, and local associations, schools, and students in efforts to create a network of students who would serve as role models for minority students. • Support development of guidelines to assist pharmacy schools in implementing minority student recruitment programs.
More TopiCS for Debate The remaining policy committees' recommendations propose that APhA: • Encourage enactment of state pharmacy practice act revisions
American Phannacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991/88
enabling pharmacists to achieve the full scope of APhA's ''Mission Statement for the Phannacy Profession." • Support the concept that the Standards of Practice for the Profession of Pharmacy should reflect the APhA "Mission Statement for the Pharmacy Profession." • Support the concept that pharmacists, by virtue of their knowledge of science and their clinical expertise, must be involved in decisions concerning therapeutic evaluation, wherever these decisions are made. • Seek explicit statutory and regulatory recognition of the pharmacist's role in therapeutic evaluations. • Encourage state boards of pharmacy to review existing internship program objectives and to update or develop quality assurance procedures regarding internships. • Support efforts of the National
Association of Boards of Pharmacy and national pharmacy associations to identify, review, update, and publish pharmacy internship guidelines as they pertain to all practice environments. • Reaffirm current APhA policy adopted in 1977 on Communication with Patients/Drug Information, which affums patients' right to be informed participants in their personal health care; affirms pharmacists' professional obligation to contribute to the education of patients to help achieve optimal drug therapy; and affirms that pharmacists should provide drugrelated information to their patients by verbal consultation, by written or printed material, or any other means best suited to patients' informational needs. • Acknowledge that the pharmacist
is responsible for initiating pharmacist-patient dialogue, determining the patient's comprehension level, and communicating at that level to optimize the patient's understanding of and compliance with drug therapy. • Encourage research and development of ancillary communications aids and techniques to maximize patient understanding of medication and its proper use. The complete reports and proposed policies of the four policy committees are available from APhA by writing APhA Committee Reports Papers, 2215 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20037 or calling (202) 4297575.
Sara Martin is senior writer of American Pharmacy.
Official Policy COInnrittee Reco1lllllendations Policy Committee on Public Affairs Members: Stephen W. Schondelmeyer, chairman, Jerry Karbeling, vice chairman, Neil M. Abel, Steve C. Firman, Christopher J. Godfrey, Janet L. Martin, Ruth Ann C. Opdycke. The Policy Committee on Public Affairs considered and recommended to the House of Delegates one matter of policy: (A) "Updating of State Pharmacy Practice Acts." In addition the committee considered two other matters, for which the committee determined it would not recommend policy to the House of Delegates. Regarding (B) "National Pharmacy Practice Act and Licensure," the committee decided to recommend no policy. In regard to (C) "Scientific Aspects of Biotechnology," the committee opted, in lieu of recommending policy, to transmit its suggestions for non-policy-related actions directly to the APhA Board of Trustees for consideration. A. Updating of State Pharmacy Practice Acts
Recommendation
$
The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA recommends and supports enactment of state pharmacy practice act revisions enabling pharmacists to achieve the full scope of APhA's "Mission Statement for the Pharmacy Profession." 2. APhA believes that the Standards of Practice for the Profession of Pharmacy should reflect the APhA "Mission Statement for the Pharmacy Profession."
B. National Pharmacy Practice Act and Licensure Although the committee was sympathetic with the . .vation of those who brought this issue forward for consideration, i.e., the growing tendency of the federal government to promote policies and programs that infringe on the practice of pharmacy, the committee did not feel that a ~ational pharmacy practice act and/or national licensure is a
22
remedy that even should receive serious consideration. Furthermore, the committee felt that the 1990 policy adopted by the House of Delegates on "Regulatory Infringements on Professional Practice" currently gives the Association sufficient flexibility to effectively address the problem. However, the committee did suggest related issues that might be considered in future APhA policy discussions: (1) the interstate practice of pharmacy and (2) the impact of third party program policies on pharmacy practice.
C. Public Aspects of Biotechnology The committee did not feel that it possessed the necessruy background and expertise to accurately and completely identify relevant public policy issues and therefore to recommend rational and meaningful policy. However, the committee recognized the need to establish a mechanism to identify biotechnology-related policy issues that need to be addressed in the near future and suggested a plan for the establishment of an Association Thsk Force on Biotechnology and Emerging Technologies, which among other things would help to identify issues related to biotechnology that should be addressed by future policy committees and subsequently by the APhA House of Delegates.
Policy Committee on Professional Affairs Members: Wilma K. Wong, chairman, Sara J. White, vice chairman, TImothy N. Burelle, Ron Geiser, Mark L. Hayes, John Rogers, Betsy L. Sleath. The Policy Committee on Professional Affairs considered and recommended to the House of Delegates two matters of policy: (A) "Emerging Technologies" and (B) "Pharmacy Technicians." In addition the committee considered one other matter, for which the committee determined it would not recommend policy to the House of Delegates. In regard to (C) "Professional Aspects of Biotechnology," the committee opted, in lieu of recommending policy, to transmit its suggestions for
American Pharmacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991190
non-policy-related actions directly to the APhA Board of Trustees for consideration. A. Emerging Technologies (Such as Biotechnology, Robotics, and Computers)
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA supports programs to monitor the development of emerging technologies and their impact on the delivery of pharmaceutical care. 2. APhA supports education of pharmacists regarding emerging technologies, including their development and impact on the delivery of pharmaceutical care. 3. APhA encourages schools of pharmacy to include information regarding emerging technologies in their curricula. 4. APhA supports the inclusion of pharmacists in the development and application of the emerging technologies in the delivery of pharmaceutical care. B. Pharmacy Technicians
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA reaffirms its policy, adopted in 1988, which opposes the licensure, registration, or certification of pharmacy technicians by statute or regulation. 2. APhA supports the voluntary certification of pharmacy technicians by the pharmacy profession. 3. APhA supports the voluntary accreditation of pharmacy technician training programs by the pharmacy profession. C. Biotechnology
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt no policy.
Policy Committee on Educational Affairs Members: Phillip R. Oppenheimer, chairman, Christopher A. Rodowskas, vice chairman, Horace C. Bynum, Edward M. DeSimone IT, Michael E. Loomis, Kristen M. Palmer, Paul Zanowiak. The Policy Committee on Educational Affairs considered and recommended to the House of Delegates five matters of policy: (A) "Recruitment of Minorities into Pharmacy Education," (B) "Development of Internship-Preceptor Guidelines," (C) ''Doctor of Pharmacy Attainment Through Nontraditional Academic Mechanisms," (D) "Doctor of Pharmacy Equivalency Program," and (E) ''Retirement of Previous Policy." A. Recruitment of Minorities into Pharmacy Education
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA supports a vigorous long-term program for the recruitment of minority students into the pharmacy profession. 2. APhA encourages the development and regular updating of comprehensive recruitment materials, directed toward minorities, that address such issues as pharmacy career opportunities, financial aid, and educational prerequisites, and that highlight professional minority role models. 3. APhA encourages national, state, and local associations,
American Pharmacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991/91
schools, and students to create a network of pharmacists who would serve as role models for minority students. 4. APhA supports the development of guidelines that assist schools of pharmacy in implementing minority student recruitment programs. B. Development of Internship-Preceptor Guidelines
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: . 1. APhA encourages state boards of pharmacy to review existing internship program objectives and to update or develop. quality assurance procedures regarding internship progn,Uns. . 2. APhA supports efforts of the National Association of . Boards of Pharmacy and national pharmacy associations to identify, review, update, and publish pharmacy intitI:!lShip. guidelines as they pertain to all practice environments. .. C. Doctor of Pharmacy Attainment Through Nontraditional Mechanisms
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Associationa,d.opt
APhA House of Delegates to
Address Pharmacists' Concerns From biotechnology to endorsement of APhA:s "Mission for Pharmacy," the House ofDe legates will consider a full range of issues during the 1991 Annual Meeting. by Sara Martin
P
harmacists' role in emerging technologies, earning a PharmD degree through nontraditional education, and certifying pharmacy technicians are among the timely and intriguing issues to be discussed by the APhA House of Delegates during the APhA Annual Meeting, March 9-13,1991, in New Orleans. APhA's four policy committees educational, public, professional, and scientific affairs - met in September 1990 to discuss issues that will be presented to the 1991 APhA House of Delegates, the largest and most representative democratic body in American pharmacy. The committees, which include pharmacists representing all segments of the profession, make recommendations that the House votes to adopt, revise, reject, or refer back to policy committee. The 1990-91 policy committees recommended 28 policies. In addition to addressing biotechnology, the PharmD degree, and pharmacy technicians, the proposed policies focus on pharmacist-patient communication, updating state pharmacy practice acts, a national pharmacy practice act and licensure, recruitment of minorities into the profession, and pharmacist involvement in therapeutic evaluation.
Preparing for Emerging Technologies Recognizing the new generation of medications and devices being produced through biotechnology, the
APhA Board of Trustees asked the 1990 policy committees to examine emerging technology and recommend Association policies as needed. The study by the policy committees resulted in eight proposed policies on the subject. Over the past decade, biotechnology has created a host of revolutionary treatments such as human insulin, human growth hormones, and erythropoietin. In the near future, researchers anticipate that biotechnology will lead to the development of monoclonal antibodies to boost the body's defenses, vaccines to help eliminate fatal diseases, and treatments to replace genes that warn of future disease. But while biotechnology products are usually designed to function as traditional drug therapies - to protect against, treat, or improve condi tions or diseases - these products are different in stability, metabolism, administration, absorption, and toxicity. They are also able to treat conditions previously not treatable by current therapies. Because of these differences, pharmacists need specialized training in biotechnological entities. The APhA House of Delegates first recognized this need in 1988 when it adopted a policy stressing the "urgent need" to educate and train pharmacists and pharmacy students in the therapeutic and diagnostic use of pharmaceutical biotechnology products. In examining the issue this year, the 1990-91 committees on scientific, public, and professional affairs reaffirmed the need to develop educational materials to help keep phar-
American Pharmacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991/87
macists current with biotechnological therapies and suggested other areas that the Association should address. The Professional Affairs Policy Committee expanded its recommendations to all emerging technologies, including such areas of research as robotics and computers. One concern identified by the Scientific Affairs Policy Committee is the need to ensure that pharmacists maintain their right to dispense biotechnology products. According to the committee report, ''There has been evidence that some manufacturers of biotechnologybased products and certain policies of governmental agencies seek to exclude pharmacy from its traditional role in the drug distribution and monitoring system." Citing the examples of radiopharmaceuticals, Clozaril (clozapine), and human growth hormones - all instances of therapies for which pharmacists may be excluded from the distribution loop - the committee asserts that pharmacy "must take whatever action is required to assure the central role of the pharmacists in dispensing, counseling, and monitoring all drug products, devices, and associated services." The committee recommends that the APhA House of Delegates adopt two policies: • A policy confirming the pharmacist's traditional role of ensuring optimal therapeutic outcomes for all medications, including biotechnologyproduced products.
• A policy stating that APhA "strongly opposes programs and policies by manufacturers, gov19
ernmental agencies, and health groups that cireumvent the pharmacist's authority and responsibility to counsel patients regarding biotechnology-based products, dispense those products, and monitor their therapeutic outcome." The committee also recognized the social and ethical concerns regarding biotechnology products. Because biotechnology products are so expensive and can save lives, the committee believes it is necessary to establish guidelines on who will receive these products, who will pay for them, and how they should be used. To address these concerns, the committee recommends that the APhA House adopt two policies: • A policy that encourages the development of materials to help pharmacists address ethical issues associated with biotechnology products. • A policy that encourages the development of materials to help phannacists counsel patients on the ethical issues associated with biotechnology products. The Public Affairs Policy Committee did not feel it had sufficient background and expertise to identifY relevant public policy issues. However, the committee recognized the need to identify policy related to biotechnology issues and recommended that APhA establish a task force on biotechnology and emerging technologies to identify biotechnology issues to be addressed by future policy committees and, subsequently, by the APhA House of Delegates.
Attaining a PharmD Prompted by the American Council on Pharmaceutical Education's (ACPE) statement of intent to accredit only doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) programs by the year 2000, the APhA Educational Affairs Policy Committee reviewed issues surrounding the PharmD degree. APhA endorsed the PharmD as the profession's sole entry-level degree in pharmacy in 1977. However, only a fraction of practitioners currently have PharmD degrees. As a result, if the ACPE statement is adopted, there will be additional pressure to provide opportunities for obtaining the PharmD degree by practitioners and students.
20
To address this concern, the Educational Affairs Policy Committee is recommending three policies: • APhA should encourage schools and colleges of pharmacy to consider offering nontraditional* postbaccalaureate PharmD degree programs. • Nontraditional programs should produce graduates who are as competent as those students who attain a PharmD degree in traditional programs. • APhA should commission a study to assess the feasibility of a PharmD equivalency certificate program for pharmacists currently holding baccalaureates in pharmacy.
Certifying Pharmacy Technicians The Professional Affairs Policy Committee addressed another potentially controversial issue - the certification of pharmacy technicians. The committee noted that APhA policy adopted in 1988 is somewhat negative and potentially confusing. The policy reads: APhA opposes the licensure, registration, or certification of pharmacy technicians by statute or regulation. The committee believes the profession should fully embrace pharmacy technicians and encourage their development. However, the committee - and most of the pharmacy profession - opposes mandatory licensure or certification of pharmacy technicians. Instead, the committee recommends and encourages voluntary certification programs that are controlled by pharmacy. In addition to reaffirming the 1988 policy, the committee recommends the House add to its policies on pharmacy technicians that: • APhA supports the voluntary certification of pharmacy technicians by the pharmacy profession. • APhA supports the voluntary accreditation of pharmacy technician training programs by the pharmacy profession.
* "Nontraditional" refers to those programs that offer PharmD degrees to practitioners who fulfill the requirements for the degree in ways other than full-time, on-campus study and clinical training. There are five such programs currently in operation.
Recruiting Minorities The Educational Affairs Policy Committee revisited an issue that has been discussed by the APhA House of Delegates several times in previous years - the recruitment of minorities into pharmacy schools. The number of minorities in pharmacy continues to lag behind the number of whites in the profession. The committee cited several reasons for this problem: • The lack of minority role models in pharmacy and the higher profile in minority communities of medicine, nursing, and dentistry as health career paths. • The high cost of education in a health profession. • The scarcity of scholarship programs. • Ignorance about pharmacy as a profession. • The image of the pharmacist, particularly in the Hispanic community, as "a drug-keeper, a businessman whose drugs are overpriced ... usually not an active participant in a community's health care." To address these concerns, the committee recommends that the House adopt the following policies that encourage APhA to: • Support a vigorous, long-term program to recruit minority students into the pharmacy profession. • Support development and regular updating of comprehensive recruitment materials for minorities that address such issues as pharmacy career opportunities, financial aid, and educational prerequisites, and that highlight professional minority role models. • Support national, state, and local associations, schools, and students in efforts to create a network of students who would serve as role models for minority students. • Support development of guidelines to assist pharmacy schools in implementing minority student recruitment programs.
More TopiCS for Debate The remaining policy committees' recommendations propose that APhA: • Encourage enactment of state pharmacy practice act revisions
American Phannacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991/88
enabling pharmacists to achieve the full scope of APhA's ''Mission Statement for the Phannacy Profession." • Support the concept that the Standards of Practice for the Profession of Pharmacy should reflect the APhA "Mission Statement for the Pharmacy Profession." • Support the concept that pharmacists, by virtue of their knowledge of science and their clinical expertise, must be involved in decisions concerning therapeutic evaluation, wherever these decisions are made. • Seek explicit statutory and regulatory recognition of the pharmacist's role in therapeutic evaluations. • Encourage state boards of pharmacy to review existing internship program objectives and to update or develop quality assurance procedures regarding internships. • Support efforts of the National
Association of Boards of Pharmacy and national pharmacy associations to identify, review, update, and publish pharmacy internship guidelines as they pertain to all practice environments. • Reaffirm current APhA policy adopted in 1977 on Communication with Patients/Drug Information, which affums patients' right to be informed participants in their personal health care; affirms pharmacists' professional obligation to contribute to the education of patients to help achieve optimal drug therapy; and affirms that pharmacists should provide drugrelated information to their patients by verbal consultation, by written or printed material, or any other means best suited to patients' informational needs. • Acknowledge that the pharmacist
is responsible for initiating pharmacist-patient dialogue, determining the patient's comprehension level, and communicating at that level to optimize the patient's understanding of and compliance with drug therapy. • Encourage research and development of ancillary communications aids and techniques to maximize patient understanding of medication and its proper use. The complete reports and proposed policies of the four policy committees are available from APhA by writing APhA Committee Reports Papers, 2215 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20037 or calling (202) 4297575.
Sara Martin is senior writer of American Pharmacy.
Official Policy COInnrittee Reco1lllllendations Policy Committee on Public Affairs Members: Stephen W. Schondelmeyer, chairman, Jerry Karbeling, vice chairman, Neil M. Abel, Steve C. Firman, Christopher J. Godfrey, Janet L. Martin, Ruth Ann C. Opdycke. The Policy Committee on Public Affairs considered and recommended to the House of Delegates one matter of policy: (A) "Updating of State Pharmacy Practice Acts." In addition the committee considered two other matters, for which the committee determined it would not recommend policy to the House of Delegates. Regarding (B) "National Pharmacy Practice Act and Licensure," the committee decided to recommend no policy. In regard to (C) "Scientific Aspects of Biotechnology," the committee opted, in lieu of recommending policy, to transmit its suggestions for non-policy-related actions directly to the APhA Board of Trustees for consideration. A. Updating of State Pharmacy Practice Acts
Recommendation
$
The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA recommends and supports enactment of state pharmacy practice act revisions enabling pharmacists to achieve the full scope of APhA's "Mission Statement for the Pharmacy Profession." 2. APhA believes that the Standards of Practice for the Profession of Pharmacy should reflect the APhA "Mission Statement for the Pharmacy Profession."
B. National Pharmacy Practice Act and Licensure Although the committee was sympathetic with the . .vation of those who brought this issue forward for consideration, i.e., the growing tendency of the federal government to promote policies and programs that infringe on the practice of pharmacy, the committee did not feel that a ~ational pharmacy practice act and/or national licensure is a
22
remedy that even should receive serious consideration. Furthermore, the committee felt that the 1990 policy adopted by the House of Delegates on "Regulatory Infringements on Professional Practice" currently gives the Association sufficient flexibility to effectively address the problem. However, the committee did suggest related issues that might be considered in future APhA policy discussions: (1) the interstate practice of pharmacy and (2) the impact of third party program policies on pharmacy practice.
C. Public Aspects of Biotechnology The committee did not feel that it possessed the necessruy background and expertise to accurately and completely identify relevant public policy issues and therefore to recommend rational and meaningful policy. However, the committee recognized the need to establish a mechanism to identify biotechnology-related policy issues that need to be addressed in the near future and suggested a plan for the establishment of an Association Thsk Force on Biotechnology and Emerging Technologies, which among other things would help to identify issues related to biotechnology that should be addressed by future policy committees and subsequently by the APhA House of Delegates.
Policy Committee on Professional Affairs Members: Wilma K. Wong, chairman, Sara J. White, vice chairman, TImothy N. Burelle, Ron Geiser, Mark L. Hayes, John Rogers, Betsy L. Sleath. The Policy Committee on Professional Affairs considered and recommended to the House of Delegates two matters of policy: (A) "Emerging Technologies" and (B) "Pharmacy Technicians." In addition the committee considered one other matter, for which the committee determined it would not recommend policy to the House of Delegates. In regard to (C) "Professional Aspects of Biotechnology," the committee opted, in lieu of recommending policy, to transmit its suggestions for
American Pharmacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991190
non-policy-related actions directly to the APhA Board of Trustees for consideration. A. Emerging Technologies (Such as Biotechnology, Robotics, and Computers)
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA supports programs to monitor the development of emerging technologies and their impact on the delivery of pharmaceutical care. 2. APhA supports education of pharmacists regarding emerging technologies, including their development and impact on the delivery of pharmaceutical care. 3. APhA encourages schools of pharmacy to include information regarding emerging technologies in their curricula. 4. APhA supports the inclusion of pharmacists in the development and application of the emerging technologies in the delivery of pharmaceutical care. B. Pharmacy Technicians
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA reaffirms its policy, adopted in 1988, which opposes the licensure, registration, or certification of pharmacy technicians by statute or regulation. 2. APhA supports the voluntary certification of pharmacy technicians by the pharmacy profession. 3. APhA supports the voluntary accreditation of pharmacy technician training programs by the pharmacy profession. C. Biotechnology
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt no policy.
Policy Committee on Educational Affairs Members: Phillip R. Oppenheimer, chairman, Christopher A. Rodowskas, vice chairman, Horace C. Bynum, Edward M. DeSimone IT, Michael E. Loomis, Kristen M. Palmer, Paul Zanowiak. The Policy Committee on Educational Affairs considered and recommended to the House of Delegates five matters of policy: (A) "Recruitment of Minorities into Pharmacy Education," (B) "Development of Internship-Preceptor Guidelines," (C) ''Doctor of Pharmacy Attainment Through Nontraditional Academic Mechanisms," (D) "Doctor of Pharmacy Equivalency Program," and (E) ''Retirement of Previous Policy." A. Recruitment of Minorities into Pharmacy Education
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: 1. APhA supports a vigorous long-term program for the recruitment of minority students into the pharmacy profession. 2. APhA encourages the development and regular updating of comprehensive recruitment materials, directed toward minorities, that address such issues as pharmacy career opportunities, financial aid, and educational prerequisites, and that highlight professional minority role models. 3. APhA encourages national, state, and local associations,
American Pharmacy, Vol. NS31, No.2 February 1991/91
schools, and students to create a network of pharmacists who would serve as role models for minority students. 4. APhA supports the development of guidelines that assist schools of pharmacy in implementing minority student recruitment programs. B. Development of Internship-Preceptor Guidelines
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Association adopt the following policies: . 1. APhA encourages state boards of pharmacy to review existing internship program objectives and to update or develop. quality assurance procedures regarding internship progn,Uns. . 2. APhA supports efforts of the National Association of . Boards of Pharmacy and national pharmacy associations to identify, review, update, and publish pharmacy intitI:!lShip. guidelines as they pertain to all practice environments. .. C. Doctor of Pharmacy Attainment Through Nontraditional Mechanisms
Recommendation The committee recommends that the Associationa,d.opt
