In Views

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

Why letting go of the dispensary might be the safest move you make this year. Trevor Gore explains…

After years of discussion and consultation, changes to pharmacy supervision are finally within reach.

The legislation has been written and widely welcomed, marking one of the biggest shifts in how community pharmacies operate in a generation.

Since December, pharmacists have been able to authorise pharmacy technicians to carry out, or supervise others carrying out the preparation, assembly, dispensing, sale and supply of medicines.

Alongside this, a change introduced in January means that once a prescription has been clinically checked and assembled, any suitably trained team member can hand it out, even if the pharmacist isn’t physically present.

For many pharmacies, that January change felt bigger in practice than on paper. Legally, it reduced the need for a pharmacist to be present for every handout. Emotionally, however, it created some unease. Even when the law allows delegation, habit and professional identity can make letting go feel risky.

Behavioural economics helps explain why. Many of us are influenced by status quo bias where we prefer doing things the way they’ve always been done.

If you’ve spent your career being present for every handout, stepping away can feel uncomfortable, even if the risk hasn’t increased.

There’s also loss aversion where we tend to worry more about what might go wrong if we delegate, than about what we might gain in terms of extra clinical time, fewer interruptions and more headspace.

Yet sticking with the old model carries its own cost. Every minute a pharmacist spends waiting to hand out a bagged prescription is a minute not spent delivering Pharmacy First consultations, prescribing or vaccinating.

The December legislation does more than tweak roles, it redistributes operational responsibility. Pharmacy technicians can be authorised to lead and supervise the supply function, but crucially, this doesn’t remove pharmacist accountability, it just clarifies it.

Superintendent pharmacists will be accountable for systems, processes and quality management across the business, including governance frameworks, SOPs, training standards and oversight. Responsible pharmacists will still oversee standards and quality within the pharmacy day to day and remain professionally responsible for the safe running of the premises while signed in.

Authorised pharmacy technicians, meanwhile, will be accountable for working safely within those systems. They’re not “taking over” the dispensary, rather they’re operating within a framework designed and governed by pharmacists.

In practice, the biggest shift is from direct to indirect supervision. Traditionally, supervision meant the pharmacist being physically present in the dispensary.

But with pharmacists increasingly delivering clinical services in consultation rooms, that model is becoming impractical. Indirect supervision relies on strong systems, clear escalation pathways and capable teams.

If this feels uncomfortable, try reframing the question. Instead of asking ‘what if something goes wrong when I’m not there?’ ask ‘what risks exist because I’m stretched too thin?’ Pharmacists acting as constant single points of failure, interrupted every few minutes, carry risks of their own.

Preparing now will make the transition smoother later. One useful behavioural nudge is Graduated Delegation. Rather than switching everything overnight in December, trial technician-led dispensing sessions or defined supervisory blocks now.

Small successes build confidence, and the new approach soon becomes routine. SOPs are also worth revisiting. Ask yourself ‘would this SOP still protect patients and the business if I weren’t in the building?’ Phrases like ‘refer to the pharmacist if unsure’ may not be enough.

Use simple ‘if X happens, do Y’ rules so you know exactly what to do. This removes hesitation and makes decisions easier because you don’t have to think about it in the moment.

Risk plans should be visible and familiar, not hidden in a folder. Define red-flag scenarios where supply stops automatically and set out clear escalation routes, including out-of-hours contacts.

Make it explicit that authorised technicians can pause supply and quarantine items without fear of blame. It’s also important not to frame delegation as doing technicians a favour.

This is a strategic response to a changing healthcare landscape, where community pharmacy is being asked to deliver more clinical care while maintaining its vital supply role, and these reforms recognise that both can coexist, just not under a 20^th century supervision model.

Pharmacies that start redesigning their systems early will likely set the pace and others will follow, because few owners want to be the outlier, clinging to inefficient processes while peer’s free up pharmacist time for higher-value care.

These changes don’t diminish the pharmacist’s role, but they do allow it to expand. With well-trained technician teams leading the operational side of supply, pharmacists can step more confidently into clinical leadership and multidisciplinary collaboration.

The law has already answered the question of whether technicians can do more. The real question is whether we’re ready to redesign our systems, and our mindsets to match modern practice.

Letting go, thoughtfully and systematically, may feel uncomfortable at first. But done well, it protects your pharmacy not just legally, but strategically, for the future.

Trevor Gore is the founder of Maestro Consulting, a Self-Care Forum trustee and associate director at the Institute for Collaborative Working.