A proposed Common Training Framework for Specialists in Laboratory Medicine under EU Directive 2013/55/EC (The Recognition of Professional Qualifications).

European Union (EU) Directive 2013/55/EC (The Recognition of Professional Qualifications) allows Member States to decide on a common set of minimum knowledge, skills and competences that are needed to pursue a given profession through a Common Training Framework. To be adopted the framework must combine the knowledge, skills and competences of at least one third of the Member States. Professionals who have gained their qualifications under a Common Training Framework will be able to have these recognised automatically within the Union. The backbone of the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine's (EFLM) proposed Common Training Framework for non-medical Specialists in Laboratory Medicine is outlined here. It is based on an Equivalence of Standards in education, training, qualifications, knowledge, skills, competences and the professional conduct associated with specialist practice. In proposing the recognition of specialist practice EFLM has identified 15 EU Member States able to meet Equivalence and in whom the profession and/or its training is regulated (an additional EU Commission requirement). The framework supports and contributes to the Directive's enabling goals for increasing professional mobility, safeguarding consumers and ensuring a more equitable distribution of skills and expertise across the Member States. It represents EFLM's position statement and provides a template for professional societies and/or competent authorities to engage with the EU Commission.

The European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine syllabus for postgraduate education and training for Specialists in Laboratory Medicine: version 5 - 2018.

Although laboratory medicine practise varies across the European Union's (EU) member states, the extent of overlap in scope is such that a common syllabus describing the education and training associated with high-quality, specialist practise can be identified. In turn, such a syllabus can help define the common set of skills, knowledge and competence in a Common Training Framework (CTF) for non-medical Specialists in Laboratory Medicine under EU Directive 2013/55/EU (The recognition of Professional Qualifications). In meeting the requirements of the directive's CTF patient safety is particularly enhanced when specialists seek to capitalise on opportunities for free professional migration across EU borders. In updating the fourth syllabus, the fifth expands on individual discipline requirements, new analytical techniques and use of statistics. An outline structure for a training programme is proposed together with expected responsibilities of trainees and trainers; reference is provided to a trainee's log book. In updating the syllabus, it continues to support national programmes and the aims of EU Directive 2013/55/EU in providing safeguards to professional mobility across European borders at a time when the demand for highly qualified professionals is increasing in the face of a disparity in their distribution across Europe. In support of achieving a CTF, the syllabus represents EFLM's position statement for the education and training that underpins the framework.

Implementation of information systems at pharmacies - a case study from the re-regulated pharmacy market in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: When the Swedish pharmacy market was re-regulated in 2009, Sweden moved from one state-owned pharmacy chain to several private pharmacy companies, and four new dispensing systems emerged to replace the one system that had previously been used at all Swedish pharmacies for more than 20 years. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this case study was to explore the implementation of the new information systems for dispensing at pharmacies. METHODS: The vendors of the four dispensing systems in Sweden were interviewed, and a questionnaire was sent to the managers of the pharmacy companies. In addition, a questionnaire was sent to 350 pharmacists who used the systems for dispensing prescriptions. RESULTS: The implementation of four new dispensing systems followed a strict time frame set by political decisions, involved actors completely new to the market, lacked clear regulation and standards for functionality and quality assurance, was complex and resulted in variations in quality. More than half of the pharmacists (58%) perceived their current dispensing system as supporting safe dispensing of medications, 26% were neutral and 15% did not perceive it to support a safe dispensing. Most pharmacists (80%) had experienced problems with their dispensing system during the previous month. The pharmacists experienced problems included reliability issues, usability issues, and missing functionality. CONCLUSION: In this case study exploring the implementation of new information systems for dispensing prescriptions at pharmacies in Sweden, weaknesses related to reliability, functionality and usability were identified and could affect patient safety. The weaknesses of the systems seem to result from the limited time for the development and implementation, the lack of comprehensive and evidence-based requirements for dispensing systems, and the unclear distribution of quality assurance responsibilities among involved stakeholders.