UK pharmacies could cut hours unless NHS provides ‘new and sufficient' funding
Independent pharmacies in England have been advised to slash their opening hours in a row over funding.
The National Pharmacy Association (NPA) said it had 'been left with little choice' but to recommend its 6,000 members take collective action for the first time in its history, unless the government provides 'new and sufficient' funding to cover significant new costs.
About 90% of an average pharmacy's work is funded via the NHS, including dispensing medication and vaccinations. But the NPA, which represents community pharmacies, says members have yet to receive any confirmation of funding for the 2024-25 or the 2025-26 financial years. Increases in employers' national insurance rates, the national living wage and business rates from April, on top of these unresolved funding issues could 'jeopardise patient safety', it says.
Significant numbers of pharmacies have already ceased trading, with 1,300 pharmacies shutting since 2017.
About 3,300 independent pharmacies took part in the NPA's ballot in November, a turnout of 63%. Individual pharmacies would have to give five weeks' notice to the NHS before reducing any services, but the advice could see fewer independent pharmacies being open in the evenings and at weekends, stopping free home deliveries, or withdrawing emergency contraception, smoking cessation and addiction support services.
Nick Kaye, chair of the NPA, said the move was necessary 'to safeguard patient services for the long term', adding: 'It is better that we temporarily reduce access in the short term than let pharmacies collapse altogether under the weight of unsustainable operating costs.
'Pharmacies have shut in record numbers and those that are left are hanging on by their fingernails waiting for the delivery of a financial settlement that protects services on which millions of people rely.
'We hope that an offer from the government emerges by 1 April to cover the additional costs which pharmacies will face and start to plug the huge gap in funding created by 10 years of real terms cuts.
'If pharmacies do not get adequate funding, then patients risk losing access to their local pharmacy altogether, threatening their access to vital medicines and health services.'
Responding to the findings, Dr Leyla Hannbeck, chief executive of Independent Pharmacies Association, said that many independent pharmacies in various parts of the country have already reduced their opening hours due to a severe lack of funding and that the trend will continue.
'We are expecting a big acceleration in pharmacy closures unless the Treasury and ministers start realising the massive impact on patient care and the workload that will be added elsewhere in the NHS when pharmacies close.'
The Liberal Democrat health and social care spokesperson, Helen Morgan, said: 'This announcement is deeply concerning and will worry many who rely on their local pharmacy to access the essential prescriptions they need to get through their daily lives.
'For too long, the government has left a massive question mark over the support they will give to pharmacies. The consequences of this failure are now painfully apparent.
'Ministers need to get around the table immediately and work around the clock to prevent this from happening, or risk many suffering unnecessarily.'
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'Community pharmacy has a vital role to play as we shift the focus of the NHS out of hospitals and into the community, through our Plan for Change.
'We are currently engaging with the sector on a settlement that will start to make it fit for the future and able to provide the services that will benefit patients and the communities that they serve.
'The National Pharmacy Association's pre-emptive action will cause unnecessary disruption for patients and we urge them to reconsider.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wales Online
39 minutes ago
- Wales Online
NHS tells Tesco shoppers to 'keep an eye out' in health alert
NHS tells Tesco shoppers to 'keep an eye out' in health alert Tesco shoppers may spot the NHS logo on a common household product The NHS has partnered with Tesco to raise awareness (Image: Getty ) The NHS is asking anyone who shops at Tesco to 'keep an eye out' and to 'contact your GP practice if something doesn't feel right'. The alert comes as customers at the major UK supermarket may spot the NHS logo on the front of Tesco's own-brand Luxury Soft toilet rolls. The partnership aims to raise awareness of bowel cancer and educate shoppers about the red-flag signs to watch out for. In a post on X, NHS said: "Keep an eye out for our logo on @Tesco toilet roll—78.9 million rolls sold and counting!" It added: "It's a reminder for people to look out for possible signs of cancer when going to the loo. Know what's normal for you and contact your GP practice if something doesn't feel right." A message on the toilet roll underneath the NHS logo reads: "Finding cancer earlier makes it more treatable and can save lives." Underneath, it continues: "See back of pack for more information." Shoppers can read through the possible signs of cancer when goingto the toilet on the packaging, which includes changes to your poo and blood in your poo. For more information on the signs of cancer, go to Content cannot be displayed without consent Article continues below Symptoms of bowel cancer may include: changes in your poo, such as having softer poo, diarrhoea or constipation that is not usual for you needing to poo more or less often than usual for you blood in your poo, which may look red or black bleeding from your bottom often feeling like you need to poo, even if you've just been to the toilet tummy pain a lump in your tummy bloating losing weight without trying feeling very tired or short of breath – these are signs of anaemia, which can be caused by bowel cancer Speak to a doctor if you have any symptoms of bowel cancer for three weeks or more. The NHS says: "Try not to be embarrassed. The doctor or nurse will be used to talking about these symptoms." Ask for an urgent GP appointment or get help from NHS 111 if your poo is black or dark red or you have bloody diarrhoea. You can call 111 or get help from 111 online. Over 200 distinct varieties of cancer exist. Cancer has the potential to impact any region of the body, including organs, blood, bone marrow, and the immune system. At times, cancer can spread from one location to another, this is referred to as secondary cancer or metastasis. 'Don't die of embarrassment' - NHS Cancer Clinical Director Professor Peter Johnson urges people to get cancer signs checked The treatment you'll have depends on the type of cancer. The most common treatments for cancer include: surgery to remove the cancer, chemotherapy, which uses medicines to kill cancer cells and radiotherapy, which uses radiation to kill cancer cells. Article continues below Treatment can also involve immunotherapy, where medicines are used to help your immune system kill cancer and hormone therapy to help stop or slow down the growth of cancer. The NHS says: "You'll be looked after by a team of specialists who will work with you to create a treatment plan that is best for you."
The Independent
41 minutes ago
- The Independent
More than 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote down ‘deeply flawed' assisted dying bill
More than 1,000 doctors have urged MPs to vote against the assisted dying bill when it returns to the Commons, claiming it is a 'real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would allow terminally ill patients with six months left to live to end their lives, is due to be voted on for a final time on 20 June. Ahead of the vote, in a letter to MPs, doctors from the NHS expressed 'serious concerns', arguing that 'this bill is not the answer". While they acknowledged that there must be a debate on end of life care, they argued too little evidence has been heard from doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. "This bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe,' they wrote, saying the bill is 'deeply flawed'. The letter has been signed by geneticist Sir John Burn, Sir Shakeel Qureshi, who received a knighthood for his work in paediatric cardiology, Professor Aileen Keel, the former deputy chief medical officer for Scotland, and Baroness Finlay, a professor of palliative medicine and member of the House of Lords. In its current form the bill, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, with approval needed from two doctors and the expert panel. Last month, MPs approved a change in the bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying. Doctors already had an opt-out, but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers. The letter, seen by Sky News, goes on to say: "Vulnerable patients are at risk of coercion with women, victims of domestic abuse, and the elderly at particular risk. People who struggle to pay for heating or care or wish to preserve their assets for their children are at high risk of choosing to die if the option is available and the alternative is more difficult." Meanwhile, Professor Colin Rees, a member of the Royal College of Physicians working group on assisted dying, said the legislation will 'have very profound consequences for the future and many doctors are really concerned that members of parliament are not hearing the views of the medical profession". "We don't think it's a bill that is safe, that protects patients, protects families, and protects the medical workforce,' he added. But Kim Leadbeater, the bill's sponsor, said assisted dying must be legalised to avoid terminally ill people acting out of desperation or making 'traumatic' trips to Switzerland. Last month, she told the Commons she has heard 'hundreds of stories from people who have lost loved ones in deeply difficult and traumatic circumstances', adding: 'If we do not vote to change the law, we are essentially saying that the status quo is acceptable.' The warning from the doctors came after TV medic Hilary Jones warned that medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if the proposed legislation is voted down. The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, said he would help a terminally ill patient to end their life if the law was changed, describing the practice as 'kind and compassionate'. Dr Jones said medics are currently 'looking over their shoulders because of the legal repercussions of the law' as it stands. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. Asked about the potential significance if the law changes, Dr Jones said: 'It will relieve healthcare professionals who deal with terminal illness. 'There are wonderful people who are caring and compassionate, who just live in fear of their actions being misinterpreted, of being accused of wrongdoing, and because of that fear, people at the end of life are often undertreated. 'People are looking over their shoulder because of the medications they're using or the doses they're using, it means that patients aren't getting the best palliative care that they could have.'
The Independent
41 minutes ago
- The Independent
Cambridge professor accused of faking poor IQ test to boost £1m brain injury compensation claim
A Cambridge University professor has been accused of deliberately flunking IQ and memory tests in a bid to boost a £1m brain damage compensation claim over botched treatment for a stroke. Orthopaedic surgeon and Cambridge school of medicine lecturer Dr Mohamed Atef Hakmi, 64, was left with permanent disabilities and had to give up surgery after suffering a stroke at home in November 2016. Claiming a failure to promptly diagnose his stroke meant he missed the chance of vital treatment, resulting in brain damage and physical disabilities, he is now suing the NHS in London's High Court for more than £1million damages. But after scoring only a "very bad" 84 on a pre-trial IQ test as part of the case - putting him well below the UK average, despite continuing to teach at one of the world's most prestigious universities - Dr Hakmi has been forced to deny deliberately throwing the tests to boost his claim. Dr Hakmi is a Hertfordshire-based orthopaedic surgeon and medical educator, who specialises in foot and ankle surgery, as well as lecturing in the UK and abroad. He is a fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons and an affiliated assistant professor at Cambridge University, where he performs a teaching role, the court heard. He first suffered a stroke in September 2016, but was given clot-busting thrombolysis treatment and made a very good recovery, returning to the operating theatre within weeks. But his barrister, Robert Kellar KC, told Judge David Pittaway KC that the surgeon had suffered a second stroke in November 2016, first spotting the symptoms while he worked late at night on paperwork. Warning signs of a stroke What are some early warning signs to look out for? When the symptoms returned again in the early hours, he went to Lister Hospital, in Stevenage, calling ahead and telling staff that he was having a stroke, said the barrister. However, he was not given the same treatment as before after being examined by an A&E doctor and then having spoken to a stroke specialist on the phone in line with the NHS' remote stroke treatment system. He says he was told he would not be offered thrombolysis because he was "not having a stroke," with the remote doctor suggesting it could be simply a migraine or epilepsy. It was not until 9am that day that his stroke was diagnosed at the hospital, at which point it was too late to be treated with the same drugs as before. Dr Hakmi accuses the NHS of "cumulative and inter-related" failings, including a "cursory and sub-standard examination" in A&E and the fact that he was only able to speak to the remote stroke specialist on the phone due to the NHS' Telemedicine system malfunctioning. Mr Kellar said Dr Hakmi had been left permanently disabled by the stroke, but that the worst of the injuries could have been avoided if not for the negligence of staff at Lister and on the remote stroke line. As well as a limp and reduced sensation in his fingers and toes, he suffers from fatigue in his right arm, hand and grip, preventing him performing complex tasks for long periods. He was also left with a brain injury, which has resulted in short-term memory impairment, impaired concentration, reduced processing speed and "executive deficits." "His confidence is low, and he is experiencing significant depressive symptoms due to physical, cognitive, speech, and language issues resulting from his second stroke, which are negatively affecting important aspects of his life," he said. "Thus, Dr Hakmi presents with cognitive deterioration, including intellectual functioning, memory, the speed at which he is processing information and executive functioning. "At the time of the index incident, he was undertaking full-time NHS employment and had a busy private practice. "He no longer has any private practice. He has returned to his NHS employment but is undertaking restricted duties because of the issues arising from his second stroke. "He no longer does any surgery. But for the breach of duty, the claimant is likely to have made a good recovery. He would have been able to return to all types of surgery that did not require a high degree of manual dexterity." But NHS barrister John de Bono KC denied that Dr Hakmi is due any damages payout at all and accused him of hamming up his symptoms while being assessed by experts before the trial. As well as the "very bad" IQ score, he had scored at the very bottom of the range in memory tests, the barrister told the court. He said that Dr Hakmi had scored only 84 on an IQ test, putting him below 86% of the general population, adding: "That's very bad - it suggests it would be hard to function as a surgeon or as an educator at that level." He had also been assessed by two neuropsychologists, who had performed memory tests, with "very surprising" and sometimes "astonishing" results which he said raised a "serious concern about whether he was putting forward his best effort" in the tests. Dr Hakmi was unable to recall more than four single digit numbers in a row during one examination and scored so low in the tests that in some respects he was below 99% of the population, despite continuing to work as an "educator" at undergraduate level. "You scored astonishingly badly for someone operating at the level you are describing this morning," he said, referencing the fact Dr Hakmi had spoken with pride in the witness box of his work with Cambridge University. "I understand you feel very strongly that you have suffered greatly as a result of this second stroke," he continued. "I understand that you feel the reason you have suffered as badly as you have is because of mistakes or negligence. I understand it must make you angry." He went on to suggest that Dr Hakmi's "sense of injustice" may have led to a desire to make sure that "people fully understand the impact this has had on you." "Is it possible when you went to be tested that you performed worse than you should have done because you were trying to demonstrate to them just how big the impact had been? "One possibility which I put to you is that you were deliberately underperforming." But Dr Hakmi denied playing up for the medics who assessed him pre-trial, telling the court he had found the tests "exhausting." He denied being dishonest with the doctors, telling the judge, "it was an exhausting environment when the tests were done in a lengthy and not organised manner. "Anybody can fail a test but they must be given the best chance," he continued. "I definitely have a memory problem, slow effort. I have done everything to mitigate my losses. I know definitely I'm not as before I had the stroke." Mr de Bono pressed on, referring to a "memory and malingering" test which had resulted in a score "very nearly at chance level," telling Mr Hakmi: "Someone giving random answers would nearly have scored as badly as you." Accusing him of "not being straightforward" with those who assessed him pre-trial, he said: "There is a pattern emerging. In any given situation, you will try and say whatever you think is going to help you most to achieve whatever your aim is." But Dr Hakmi hit back: "I have been straightforward in everything in my life. I have aimed to be a surgeon again, but I have failed." The damages claim is against the East and North Hertfordshire NHS Trust, which runs the Lister Hospital, and the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, where the remote stroke doctor who spoke to Dr Hakmi was based. The trusts both deny blame, saying he was "at all times treated with reasonable care and skill by highly competent clinicians." He was assessed as being unsuitable for thrombolysis treatment because his symptoms were not serious enough and it was too late after the onset of his symptoms. Such treatment can also be risky, carrying a significant risk of brain haemorrhage and death, said the NHS barrister, and even if he had been given it the outcome would probably have been the same. The trial continues.
