Practice standards and Poms

Re: Practice standards and Poms

Bob Russell — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:25:15 GMT

The VMD is such a small organisation. It is 80% paid for by the pharmaceutical industry. It has no political 'clout' because nobody is interested in animal medicines until there is a food scare!

The VMD is largely (IMO of course) a pretty toothless organisation because it has been made that way! At least it does not use bluster to bully any more!

It could do a lot more if it chose but there is neither the will nor capability to do much more than the basics.

Re: Practice standards and Poms

J G Wray — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 08:45:10 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]The VMD is pretty irrelevant to all this.[/quote]

I disagree. The VMD could, if it chose to, impose a requirement for reduction of wastage for an "environmental gain" JGW

Re: Practice standards and Poms

Bob Russell — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 08:04:10 GMT

Our local Boots the Chemist would be stuffed if this sort of interpretation was implemented. All the POM's are visible behind the dispensary counter. This sort of nonsense prevents me from considering the PSS.

I agree there are much bigger problems with the rules.

I was under the impression that failure to dispose of medicines after an arbitrary period was an issue for trading standards, not the VMD as it is considered a quality issue.

Does anybody remember any failure of that injection (or an infection caused) taken from a bottle that has been sitting on a shelf gathering dust?

A big bottle costs more than a little one and creating a smaller pack requires a daft level of re licensing!

Nothing much for the pharmaceutical company to gain here by changing things!

The VMD is pretty irrelevant to all this.

Re: Practice standards and Poms

J G Wray — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:31:22 GMT

[quote user="karen jones"]We had our PPS inspection in February and one of the things we were pulled up on was displaying Pom s behind our counters. [/quote]

We've just had our second site inspection by the VMDs professional inspectorate, the AMI. These are not amateur part timers relying on intermittent contact with VMD.

We have no POMs in sight or within reach of clients. We even removed a pot of hand cleanser from front desk because it had the word "Veraflox" on it.

This area is confused. Websites such as the following are a case in point

http://www.hamptonparkvets.co.uk/

You will see this is a PSS practice. Scroll down to the bottom of the page and you will see links to Frontline Combo and Milbemax, err sitting with the RCVS logo in between.

We feel no need to have POMs anywhere near front desk or advertise them and have no wish to do anything other than meet the meds regulations. We can't see a reason to poke VMD in this respect.

This sort of thing is small potatoes. What we, our practice, would like to see is big organisations like BVA bringing their much vaunted influence to play on VMD to bring about a change in bottle size for many of the medications we use to reduce wastage through expiry. There is a reluctance in BVA to do this, which is strange. There is no drive in VMD, which is strange and considerable intertia amongst the pharmas because they make their money rather like Mr Coleman and his mustard.

JGW

Re: Practice standards and Poms

Niall Taylor — Wed, 17 Apr 2013 07:18:44 GMT

[quote user="robloxley"] can you get this in writing?[/quote]

http://www.vmd.defra.gov.uk/pharm/advertisingfaq.aspx

6. Is it acceptable to store prescription products within view of a public area?

We do not consider the storage of veterinary medicines within view of a public area (e.g. on display behind a retail counter) to be an advert as no one product is being promoted. This practice is acceptable as long as no attempt is made to make any product(s) more prominent than the others.

Cheers,

Niall

Re: Practice standards and Poms

Rob Loxley — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 23:22:25 GMT

[quote user="karen jones"]pharmacy course where the VMD man said that as far as he was concerned they could be in view but clients couldn't help themselves[/quote]

can you get this in writing?

Re: Practice standards and Poms

Niall Taylor — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:36:09 GMT

[quote user="karen jones"]Lets hope the review planned will sort things like this[/quote]

Well, I wouldn't hold your breath . The PSS is over-engineered, arbitrary and highly inconsistent - I can't see it changing.

Niall