Revalidation arrangements for pharmacy professionals in industry and academia in Great Britain: A qualitative study

Background: Pharmacy, like other health professions in Great Britain (GB), is currently considering potential future revalidation arrangements for its members. To date, evidence about performance appraisal arrangements for pharmacy professionals working in nonpatient-facing sectors has been scarce. Objectives: This study aimed to explore the use of appraisals and other sources of evidence for the purposes of revalidating pharmacy professionals working in the pharmaceutical industry and in academia. Methods: A qualitative study was undertaken; the sampling strategy was purposive and telephone interviews were carried out with pharmacy professionals working in pharmaceutical companies and schools of pharmacy in GB. The interviews were semistructured and the topic guides were designed to elicit participants' experiences of appraisal systems and views about the relevance of such systems to revalidation. The data generated were analyzed using the framework technique. Results: Fourteen pharmacists and pharmacy technicians working in pharmaceutical companies and schools of pharmacy in GB took part in interviews. All participants had experience of appraisals but did not tend to link these to revalidation. Other sources of evidence relating to work performance were described and some aspects of pharmaceutical industry requirements were seen as potentially relevant to revalidation. The importance of being assessed by someone with an adequate understanding of the area of practice was emphasized in both sectors. Conclusions: Although industry and academia are "nonpatient-facing" sectors, much work undertaken within them is still professional pharmacy practice. There are defined governance roles in industry, which need to be undertaken by reliable and competent practitioners. Those responsible for any future revalidation system in pharmacy must ensure it is underpinned by an adequate and up to date understanding of the context and nature of the work undertaken by those it covers to ensure that measures of fitness to practice are valid. © 2013 Elsevier Inc.