I Want To Be a Pharmacist

Before I was an MT I was, and still am, a registered pharmacy tech.  When an order comes to the pharmacy it is checked by the receiver and ultimately by the pharmacist.  If the instructions are not clear, seem ambiguous or downright wrong, or if it is suspected that the patient-Dr. relationship is at best, lacking; it is the duty of the pharmacy, to the patient, to double check.  This is in place not only for the protection of the patients health, but also for the protection of the overworked Dr./nurse that sent the prescription.  It is a system of checks and balances.  

When an order comes to the lab the same thing is done to a degree.  We don't usually know why the Dr. is ordering the test and it really doesn't matter; they want the results of the test they ordered and if we have enough specimen to do that test we are obligated to do so.  However, if we suspect that the test ordered is a typo or a reason for the test is stated and it doesn't match the test ordered; it is our duty to the Dr./patient/insurance company/lab to verify the order to prevent having to call the patient back in and cost the facility or insurance unnecessary monies.

While the two professions offer healthcare services, the outcomes may be very different.  If I dispense an inappropriate medication on doctor's orders, I may kill a patient.  Am I responsible?  Legally, no but if I suspected an error and didn't check it then yes, I had a hand in it.  If I do the wrong test on doctor's orders the likelihood of a patient dying because of that test is low.  The likelihood of a patient dying because I did not check something that appeared to be opposite of what was intended is slightly higher, but still, testing takes time and even a stat test is going to take a few minutes to days (depending on the test) and can be redone.

All this being said my point is not to downgrade the roll that the lab plays.  I think it is a fantastic thing that there are pharmacists who are able and willing to provide these services to patients and I think that the lab is still a Very important part of patient care as well.  As stated, it is the laboratorian's place to push for those powers, not the doctor's place to lift us up.  Also as stated, it does sometimes appear that we as the lab, have 'lesser roles' because of our inconspicuousness and it is up to us to bring ourselves out into the light and petition for a standardization.  As long as we allow the so called upper echelon to dictate how the lab is run it will continue to be so.  Just as the pharmacist has overseers so does the lab and even the pathologist.  Everybody has a boss but it is up to us to treat each other as colleagues and not employees and recognize that there is someone that knows more no matter what profession.  When everybody looks at the entire healthcare field as a collaboration, not as one-up-ment in the rungs of the ladder of hierarchy, only then will there be equality.

MT

Thanks for the comment. You make an interesting point about the influence of physicians on CLS and other professions. That is simply a matter of competition: few people will willingly cede influence and income to another group.

What's interesting is that although physicians have traditionally held a position of superiority over nurses, they (physicians) have not chosen to regulate nurses, dictate their practice or claim they can be legitimate substitutes for nurses.

Our (laboratorians') willingness to remain subservient to pathologists and to support pathology organizations that clearly state their opinion that laboratorians are simply "pathologist-helpers"  only empower those who do not support our interests.

It's interesting that pharmacists have aggressivley resisted the old "dispense whatever the physician orders"  and created the rule of "as the experts on medications we will review orders, make suggestions, point out errors before dispensing and in some cases change orders based on protocol." That change in paradigm was all the pharmacists' doing. It wasnt done by doctors.

That's what we have to learn and be willing to do.

The main problem with the laboratory profession is that we do not have our own board. The ASCP does not advocate for the laboratorian, they are in it for the pathologist.

They will support the pathology assistant not the doctorate in clinical laboratory science.

The profession that have no MD influence like, pharmacy and dentistry are thriving.

The profession that have MD influences like physical therapy (they need a reference from a MD). Optometrist have limited scope of practice because of the Opthamologist they are struggling.

I see nursing reaching the level of pharmacy with the new DNP schools graduating students with the full scope in some states without MD influence.

This progression of our profession has to do with controlling our own profession, since we do not we will only move backwards. This is best illustrated by not having to be licensed in all 50 states and not having one conrete certification agency.