Pharmacist reviewed my prescription?

[adultcat]

I live in a smallish village - the kind where everyone know each other (or thinks they do!). I serve my doctor and pharmacist where I work so am familiar with them.
Today, I went to collect my repeat prescription and was asked if I had five minutes to spare for the pharmacist to speak to me. We went off in the side room and he logged on to the computer. He then asked me if I was happy with my medication / any side effects. Asked me if I am happy with my contraception and what alternatives there were as I've stopped taking the mini pill as I wasn't getting on with it - he wanted to know why...!
The whole 'chat' felt really uncomfortable, possibly because I serve him as a customer but I was wondering if this is a done thing now? I thought it would be my doctors place to review my medication and check everything is ok?
Has anyone else had this done??

Yes, I too was slightly taken aback by this last year. Perfectly normal procedure to check up on medication. I actually had a good chat to him and now feel able to approach him if I am not sure about something. Mention him to a GP who knew him slightly and I explained how I appreciated his attention to detail. GP said he would flag that up at the next opportunity and it was good to know.

What a sad world we live in where a male medical professional cannot ask a question as part of their job to a female without "alarm bells" going off. Just because the medication is contraceptive? I mean, really?

A lot of posters here are getting offended and sniffy because some people are saying they prefer not to have a Medicine Review because they find it intrusive and uncalled for, and being proper arsey with people. Weird that!

If people want to refuse they are entitled to, and it's got sod-all to do with you uppity folk on here having a go at them. So mi dyer beeswax. They don't have to answer to you, or explain themselves....

Yeah they do it to check your meds, and the £25 they get for every person they do it for, is NOTHING to do with it IS it?

Pharmacist saved me once by looking at my prescription, asking if I could wait, phoned the doctor who sent a nurse with the corrected (dose divided by 10) prescription.

Checking dosage with the prescriber is absolutely good practice on the part of the pharmacist.

Implying that these assessments are compulsory/required by the doctor and giving people advice based on personal belief is not.

Pulling a woman into a cubicle to discuss her contraception with a complete stranger who is not her doctor is overstepping into the doctor role as the discussion will go beyond side effects and into the personal if its to be useful.

Advising the patient to refer back to the doctor for review if they experience particular side effects or recommending time of day for dosage is fine.

It's very useful, the pharmacist was the one who noticed when a gp had prescribed my 5 year old with the adult version of medication.

I think being asked out on a date after the same male medical professional has just been asking if you were having unprotected sex with your boyfriend is somewhat alarming, yes.

I was asked a few months back to come fr a medicine review - (ONLY 5 minutes she said....but it's always half hour!)

I said I did not have time, and she said 'well OK, but we WILL get you next time, you WON'T get away next time.'

'Ha ha' I said. WRONG! No-one tells me what to do. Fuck off. 6 months on and she has not 'got me' yet.

The nhs have asked pharmacists to offer this service for 15 years, it’s not a new thing.
It should be offered to patients on certain medications like asthma drugs, diabetes and drugs for heart disease.
And they legally have to take you to a private area, it’s a requirement of the service.

Post before my last one was meant to say 'mind yer beeswax' - in paragraph two! Stupid phone!

@C8H10N4O2

So referring them back to their GP if they've experience side effects is fine... But how would he find out if they've experience side effects if you don't think he should ask "why have you stopped taking this, were there aide effect?" Simply because the medicine happens to be Contraception? So he's fine to send her back to a doctor for aide effects.... he just can't actually find out if there are any in the first place.

I actually feel quite baffled and bemused that ao many of you think that us poor little women cant handle being asked about side effects of contraception by a professional who plays a role in monitoring effects of drugs. It's a medication. He asked a pertinent question. It's not a violation.

What's amazing me on this thread, is the amount of people implying the pharmacist knows MORE than the fucking doctor.

Jesus wept.

Pharmacists are basically failed doctors.

People who have declined, why would you decline something that is free, takes about five minutes, and is entirely for your benefit?

Aaaargh - I HATE that pharmacies do this. I was invited in for one before I had read more about them. Assumed they had a quota to get so thought 'Why not?' Thought it would help the person hit their targets.

They knew less about my medications than I did! Utterly pointless.

The bit that REALLY pisses me off though is that they charge the NHS up to around £50 for doing it. Disgusting waste of resources.

Pharmacists are failed doctors? Bollocks!

The fact that he started asking her about contraception after he had taken her into a private area really rings alarm bells for me.

So he is supposed to ask her a private question in an open shop floor? You know, there is this thing called data protection....

All the pharmacies I use have a private consulting room. My medication reviews have always been done in private. I can't imagine it being done in public, where any random customer could overhear.

I think any customer can ask to speak to the pharmacist in private?

People who have declined, why would you decline something that is free, takes about five minutes, and is entirely for your benefit?

It’s not free though is it? They charge it back. Bit like telephone surveys.

I have taken the same medication for years. There isn’t anything else.

No point

I actually feel quite baffled and bemused that ao many of you think that us poor little women cant handle being asked about side effects of contraception by a professional who plays a role in monitoring effects of drugs.

Oh don't be ridiculous. In the days when I needed contraception the contraception reviews included asking about my sex and relationship status.

That is none of my pharmacists business, he isn't a doctor and I've no intention of using him as one.
Both pp upthread and one of my children were asked entirely inappropriate questions by male pharmacists who did not confine themselves to discussing side effects. (including the fantastic advice that as a young woman she should be marrying and having babies).

I was advised to try some woo crap by a pharmacist selling homeopathic remedies. I was also given seriously bad advice about stopping medicine which I need without being referred back to a doctor first.

So no, I'm not supporting this initiative without some actual evidence to show it benefits patients.

Check dosage, advise on possible side effects to look out for, suggest over the counter stuff for common ailments - all fine. But pharmacists are not doctors.

As a pre-registration pharmacist, it makes me so sad to see how the general public perceive pharmacists. A pharmacist now has to complete 5 years of training (masters degree and another year of on the job training either in hospital, community, a GP practice or industry) before qualifying.

Doctors are experts in diagnosing and we are experts in the use of medication, it's not 'overstepping into the doctor role' to discuss someone's medication with them, it's two sets of complimentary skills. Yes a small charge is paid per Medicines use review performed but there's a limit on how many a year you can perform. The focus everywhere is actually in utilising a pharmacists knowledge more, especially in community where to ease the burden on GP surgeries and hospitals, they actually want us to perform more services as we are well equipped to do so. You also will start to see pharmacists in your GP surgeries as they are being employed there to manage chronic conditions, promote good prescribing practice and help reduce medicines related costs.

The profession is changing like how the role of a nurse has evolved. This ramble wasn't to say that all pharmacists are created equal (there are appalling members of many professions) however and you absolutely can complain about their manner/ not gaining informed consent for services etc.

I once went to pick up my Dad's prescription. Pharmacist took me to one side and said my dads gout could be attributed to his blood pressure pills, and there were better alternatives . Turned out he was right.

This happens to me every so often. I used to find it irritating, but I've found out a couple of useful things, because the pharmacist has a better overview than the GP of how people react to various medications.

What's amazing me on this thread, is the amount of people implying the pharmacist knows MORE than the fucking doctor.

When it comes to medication, yes they do.

Twice I've had my pharmacist save my life by identifying an allergen in medication that I'd been prescribed, despite it being all over my notes, in big letters on the top of my computer file, and me telling the GP three times.

And I was on medication once that I went for a repeat and the GP said that since I wasn't experiencing symptoms anymore that I should stop it. I actually had the pharmacist ring me to ask why I hadn't put in my regular script, and told me that there would be some pretty significant side effects if I just stopped taking it without stepping down slowly.

I've experienced some really good pharmacists but I'm steering clear until I see evidence of consistent quality and patient benefits for the money we pay for the service (via taxation).

I've experienced some really good doctors but I have never seen any evidence of consistent quality and patient benefits for the money we pay for the service (via taxation) for them either!

The trouble is, steering clear of them would probably mean I died fairly soon, and my quality of life would be crap until I did.

OP, some time just before Christmas I was asked if I minded having a chat with the pharmacist about my repeat prescriptions and duly had one. The advice I got as a result of that chat was that once the Christmas/New Year rush was over I ought to make an appointment with my doctor to discuss a potential side-effect of one medication that I am on and the undesirability of being given another medication to suppress the symptoms I have suffered recently which may be caused by the first one, because the pharmacist was concerned about the possibility of cascade medication. Since the doctor who prescribes it is intransigent about there being no possible substitute (there are at least three, but they are more expensive), it's quite useful to have pharmacist-backup that there definitely are and that I would like to try one rather than the present medication, rather than just "my friend who trained as a doctor ten years ago says", when I go in to have a chat with the GP about this.

A Boots pharmacist saves my daughter's life. My then five year old caught swine flu a few years ago and was prescribed Tamiflu by GP.
On questioning me, the pharmacist realised that the GP got mixed up with the metric system and prescribed Tamiflu for a 52kg adult instead. This heavy dosage could have killed my daughter. I trust pharmacists more than GPs when it comes to medication. I always ask them their views and professional opinion first before accepting a GP's prescribed medicine.

And yes, Magenta46, like your dad I don't like gout: it's almost unbearably painful! But I don't want to start taking a prescribed medication to stop the gout that is almost certainly being caused by a prescribed medication: I'd rather change the prescribed medication.

They are not failed doctors.
They specialise in drug therapy, review medicines for safety etc.
They study pharmaceutical sciences which are different studies from GPs . They ,therefore, are more knowledgeable about drugs as it is what they studied. They are not medical doctors; complete different profession.