Independent prescribing in the UK: insights from the Department of Health Allied Health Professions Medicines Project team.

Abstract

Background: The UK medicines legislation was amended ten years ago (2013) to allow podiatrists and physiotherapists independent prescribing rights, the first of the allied health professions to do so. Non-medical prescribing formed one part of a broader policy agenda promoting role flexibility in response to the challenge of an ageing population and the need to maintain effective health provision in the face of a contracting workforce.

Aim: The aim of this study was to outline the experiences of the Department of Health AHP medicines project board team in working towards independent prescribing for podiatry and physiotherapy, with a particular focus on the challenges encountered.

Methods: In depth, open-ended interviews were conducted with eight of the core members of the project team, drawn from those individuals who served throughout the duration of the project (2010-2013). Included were the former Department of Health Chief and Deputy Chief Allied Health Professions Officers; the Department of Health Engagement and Communications Officer; representatives of the Health and Care Professions Council; the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency; the Council of Deans of Health; the Royal College of Podiatry and the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (The team also included the representative of the Allied Health Professions Federation. However, as that representative is also a researcher in this study, he has recused himself from any role as a participant.). Data were transcribed and subject to a thematic analysis.

Results: A complex picture of the project emerged revealing a range of obstacles and challenges, including inter-professional role boundary tensions and negative prior assumptions about the two professions. Success hinged upon the adoption of a dual strategy involving submission of a robust case of need focused on patient benefit coupled with the careful management of professional expectations. Underpinning theory from the sociology of the professions offers a supportive explanatory framework for understanding the relationships between the various stakeholders involved.

Conclusions: Ultimately, success depended upon aligning the project aims with healthcare policy through a clear focus on patient benefit. Balancing competing professional and policy demands through a continual emphasis on improved patient care laid the foundations for future projects by other allied health professions.