Pharmd Course in India - Prospects & Constraints

[Guest guest]

Dear Members:

Here is another letter from AJPE on the controversy surrounding PharmD degree written by a student of Clinical Pharmacy at the International Medical University Malaysia. Feedback from all is solicited.

With regards

Dr. Geer M. Ishaq

Assistant Professor

Dept. of Pharmaceutical Sciences

University of Kashmir

Srinagar-190006 (J & K)

Ph: 9419970971, 9906673100

Website: http://ishaqgeer.googlepages.com

The Controversy of PharmD Degree

With the help of the American Journal of Pharmacy Education (AJPE), which has established a

reputation for providing a forum for discussion about the issues in pharmacy education and practice, I would

like to draw the attention of readers – especially people in the pharmacy profession – toward issues regarding the

doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) degree. In reference to a letter recently published in AJPE,

entitled ‘‘PharmD Degree in Developing Countries,’’ I have a few concerns with the author’s criticism of the

progress of the PharmD program in developing countries such as India, Pakistan, and Iran.1 I agree that the PharmD

degree is a multidisciplinary and multifactorial program with the aim of producing a pharmacist equipped with

better clinical skills who can provide pharmaceutical care to the patient. Before we comment on this program, we

must look at the history of the development of the pharmacy profession. It took years for the pharmacy profession

to be recognized as a separate health care profession, which is very different from the traditional perception

of pharmacy as a compounding and dispensing job. Further, it took years, even in developed countries like

the United States, to revolutionize the pharmacist’s job from merely a dispenser to a highly skilled clinical pharmacist.

As states: ‘‘The clinical pharmacy movement began at the University of Michigan in the early

1960s.’’3

Now, in countries like the United States, mostly clinically skilled pharmacists are required in order to fulfill

the requirements of the system that has developed there over the years. Because the PharmD program was first

introduced in the United States, the curriculum is modified to be useful for that system, having more training,

attachments, and clinical studies. Now the question arises, where does the practice of pharmacy stand in other

countries? We know that the conditions are worse in developing countries where the profession is still fighting

to be recognized with its own worth and reputation.

In most of these countries, the main option for a graduated pharmacist is still to work in pharmaceutical industries.

If those graduates had not learned anything about industrial pharmacy in their pharmacy curriculum, what

would they do? That is why they still keep the industrial pharmacy aspects as part of their curriculum, together

with the introduction of more clinically oriented modules and hospital attachments. Here an issue arises that has

somehow become a bone of contention among pharmacy professionals all over the world: since every country has

its own standards of pharmacy practice, is it right to at least produce similarity in terms of degree that these graduates

are getting from different universities in the world? In my opinion we should have a similarity of degrees

issued. One major reason is that when different graduates from different parts of the world want to write any pharmacy

board registration examination, the first consideration goes to their education evaluation in terms of

number of years they spent to get their basic degree. In this respect, it would not be fair to these graduates if they

can not take these registration examinations because they do not have a-5-year PharmD degree.

According to the Foreign Pharmacy Graduate Equivalency Examination (FPGEE) Committee: ‘‘Beginning January 1, 2003,

NABP will require foreign educated pharmacists to have earned their professional degree from a five-year curriculum

program in order to apply for Foreign Pharmacy Graduate Examination Committee (FPGEC) Certification.’’

The decision is said to have been prompted by establishment of the 6-year doctor of pharmacy (Pharm

D) curriculum in the United States.4 Another issue is whether any criteria determine that countries can award a PharmD degree with modified curriculum

according to their pharmacy practice requirements. In our opinion it is an issue that should be

discussed rather than simply criticized. Since the 4-year bachelor of pharmacy degree program is still being used

in the majority of the countries in the world as a basic pharmacy program, when it was in practice in the United

States and other developed countries before introducing the PharmD program, even then there was a difference in

pharmacy practice and standards in different countries so why all of sudden with PharmD degree introduction a lot

of criticism starts on these countries since they are trying to move together with the world.

In conclusion, our opinion is that the PharmD degree either (1) should be specified for producing clinical pharmacists,

and bachelor of pharmacy programs should be continued as basic degree programs; or (2) there must be

a similar definition of the PharmD degree all over the world. We think this decision should be made by decision-

making authorities/associations who seek out the opinions of experts in the field. We also need to open this

topic for discussion so that more ideas can be shared on some basic facts, and not simply criticize and present our

own views. We hope that authorities will take this issue in consideration before it starts affecting pharmacists.

Syed ImranAhmed,BPharm, MPharm(Clinical Pharmacy)

School of Pharmaceutical and Health Sciences

International Medical University

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now