Pharmacists are the health
care professionals responsible for providing patient care that ensures optimal
medication therapy outcomes. They do this by taking responsibility in the
quality of medicines supplied to patients; ensuring that the supply of
medicines is within the law; ensuring that the medicines prescribed to patients
are suitable; advising patients about medicines, including how to take them,
what reactions may occur and answering patients' questions. They achieve these
objectives with the assistance of pharmacy technicians who perform non-core
tasks that include receiving, arranging, assembling medicines for prescription,
labelling and ordering of medications.
The Pharmacy and Poisons Act
(Cap. 244) came into force in 1956 to control of the profession of pharmacy. At
the commencement of the Act, only the holders of at least a bachelor of pharmacy
degree or persons previously registered as ‘pharmacist’ by the Pharmacy and
Poisons Ordinance (Cap. 128 (1948) (now repealed) irrespective of the
qualifications held ('compounders', 'druggists', 'apothecarists', 'dispensers' etc), qualified to be registered as pharmacists. Between 1949 and 1978, only foreign trained persons could be registered as pharmacists, as there was no local university offering the training. In 2002, as an
intervention to improve access to pharmaceutical services in underserved areas,
an amendment was made to the Act to allow the Board to enroll ‘pharmaceutical
technologists’ (Kenyan term Pharmacy Technicians). Under this intervention, the
Board allowed pharmaceutical technologists of a certain experience to establish
independent sole proprietor dispensing outlets.
The recent Health Laws
(Amendment) Bill of 2018 published on 10th of April 2018, initially
appeared to the stakeholders (as it should) that it was making administrative
changes to Pharmacy and Poisons Board, aligning it with MWONGOZO – The Code of
Governance for State Corporations. It was not to be. Last week, the National
Assembly at the committee stage of the Bill, essentially redefined the
profession of pharmacy by introducing a ‘pharmaceutical practitioner’.
World over, only two cadres
are known in pharmacy: a pharmacist and a pharmacy technician. Both of these
cadres have routinely and erroneously been referred by the members of the
public (and even the media) as ‘pharmacists’. The ‘pharmaceutical technologist’
title is a misnomer because a pharmaceutical technologist is a graduate-level
industrial application scientist that in pharmaceutical manufacturing. It is
worth noting that some jurisdictions, like the Republic of Uganda have
‘pharmacists’ and ‘pharmacy technicians’ but only pharmacists are mentioned in
the law.
The title of a
‘pharmaceutical practitioner’ if passed, introduces ambiguity in law subject to
varied interpretation. If it was intended to simplify the definition of a
person authorised to practice pharmacy in Kenya and not to unify the pharmacist
and ‘pharmaceutical technologist’ as one profession, it will fail because the
title ‘pharmaceutical practitioner’ legally denotes equivalence and a
‘pharmacist’ is the professional in pharmacy practice. It casts the role and
the legality of the para-professional into doubt during implementation.
If the purpose of the
amendment was to increase access, the law already provided for this 2002. In
any case this increased access has had its problems. There has been a rampant
illegal licence renting to quacks since then (some are even published in social
media). As the focus of these practices have been sales by any means to anyone,
some of these medicines have ended up being used to ‘drug’ unsuspecting people
and rampant abuse of prescription drugs by teens and young people.
The new law also expands,
without applying any caution, a wholesale licence to the so called ‘pharmaceutical
practitioner’. As much as Section 27 (1) and (2) still gives the Board the
discretion to issue a licence, the amendment failed to recognize the regulatory
role of a wholesale pharmacy practice. A wholesale practice performs
pharmacovigilance, drug recalls and control of dangerous drugs; some which may
have been observed by casual observers as ‘movement of boxes from one place to
another’. It therefore defeats the purpose to licence such a function to a
‘pharmaceutical practitioner’, but require the practice to employ pharmacists
to fulfil its objectives.
What will then be the future
of enrolled ‘pharmaceutical technologists’?
Going forward, we need to align
pharmacy laws with the existing policies. The first Kenya National Drug Policy
(KNDP) of 1994 sought develop pharmacy specialists to direct pharmacy practice,
provide pharmacists who primarily delivers patient care and reintroduce pharmacy
technicians to assist the pharmacist by carrying out non-clinical duties in a
pharmacy. The policy spelt out provisions to allow the existing ‘pharmaceutical
technologists’ to proceed to University and attain standards registerable by
the Pharmacy and Poisons Board for practice as pharmacists. KNDP was succeeded
by the Sessional Paper Number 4 on the National Pharmaceutical Policy which
reaffirmed that pharmacy delivers to the Kenyan health system two
outcomes: integrity of a pharmaceutical supply system and appropriate medicines
use. These are the essential roles of a pharmacist – leadership and clinical –
in pharmacy practice and healthcare in general.