Pharmaceutical Review (www.pharmarev.com) Professor Dr. Bashir Ahmad (Professor of pharmacology, University of the Punjab, Lahore) president Pakistan Pharmacist Association (PPA) Punjab, Pakistan; Syed Sultan president PPA Baluchistan; Fiaz Ahmad Faizi Vice president PPA Punjab and Furqan K. Hashmi General Secretary PPA Punjab has collectively disapproved the preliminary revised six year curriculum of Pharm-D proposed by Higher Education Commission, Pakistan.
They said in their unanimous statement that the current curriculum of Pharm. D, a five year degree program was imposed by the Pakistan Pharmacy Council in 2004. Its revision was underway since April 2010 by the curriculum committee of the Pakistan Pharmacy Council and Higher Education Commission. Now, the final version of the draft is ready to be implemented, though there are plenty of shortcomings. Instead of going in detail, the present article is being penned to draw the attention of signatories of the draft of the curriculum to look into the matter of pre-registration additional one year training in various areas of pharmacy profession after getting the Pharm. D degree. The students, parents and academia have several reservations for this additional year, some of which are given herein. Thus; the revised curriculum disapproved on the six following major logics;
1. Legal issue: The imposition of additional one year training before registration of pharmacy graduates is a violation of the section 25 (1) (a), (b) and (c) of The Pharmacy Act 1967, which describes the eligibility criterion for the registration of pharmacists in various categories (Khan, 2008a). Therefore, pharmacy graduates need not be deprived of their right to be registered in category “A” as per law.
2. Increase in duration of Pharm. D programme: Under the prevailing financial situation in the country, the increase in duration, an additional 6th year will be a burden on the poor nation. Moreover, to spend 6 years just for a graduation degree is not justified and will further worsen the economic status of the community.
3. Production of large number of pharmacy graduates: In present scenario both the public and private sector universities are producing pharmacy graduates much more than the number of jobs available in public and private sectors. As a result of this an overwhelming majority of pharmacy graduates are unemployed, and the same is reported by Hussain et al. (2006).
4. Agreement for one year pre-registratin training: At present there is no agreement or legal binding on the pharmaceutical industries, hospitals, community pharmacies and health authorities on providing this one year training attachment. The students who have to travel from far-off areas to major cities for training; hence, hostel accommodation will be a big problem for them.
5. Unnecessary binding on students: Imposition of additional one year pre-registration training will be an unnecessary binding on the students willing to adopt teaching job, governmental job, carrier abroad or pursue higher education after their graduation.
6. Cost of attachment: It is not clear that whether this one year attachment is paid or unpaid, and if paid then who will bear the cost of this attachment? In some countries, pre-registration training is mandatory and instituted to compensate the resource deficiency, structured and well-paid by the state.