In pharmacist Andrew Schonbe’s response to a recent op-ed from Dr. Edwin Kruys, 5 little-known reasons why pharmacists should not be playing doctor, he fought back against Krys for “challenging progress and advancement in the expanded scope of pharmacy practice.”
Schonbe described the piece as “alarming, albeit not surprising,” as well as “insulting” and “self-righteous,” and proceeded to go through Krys’ claims one at a time.
Kruys wrote that pharmacists “want to be doctors” or “want to be paid for what they think are the easy parts of the doctor’s job,” but Schonbe responded that that isn’t the case. He says it’s a matter of identifying any potential overlap in skills and training, and expanding a pharmacist’s scope accordingly.
When a patient comes to their doctor to have a prescription refilled, he said he believes that’s “a valuable opportunity for a family doctor to screen for, and treat health issues before they escalate.” Schonbe agrees that patients see their doctor for quality medical care — “not just a slip of paper” — and suggests implementing a system where a prescription could indicate if a patient should get all new scripts from their doctor directly, or if a pharmacist is authorized to issue a refill.
Kruys’ op-ed compared pharmacists having a larger role in medicine to someone buying a book on law and representing themselves in court. Schonbe described this view as “misguided,” and suggested it originated more from “a feeling of personal superiority than logic and reason.”
Kruys’ conclusion was that pharmacists “playing doctor” would hinder general practitioners in the delivery of care, and eventually increase costs. Schonbe agreed that there were concerns and limitations to expanding the scope of pharmacists, but said there needs to be “an open and respectful conversation” without insults or negativity to an entire profession.
H/T Medical Post
