| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « May | Sep » | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | ||||
- Uncategorized (53)
- 13/09/2011: AMTRA appoint three new SQP assessors
- 18/08/2011: CPD exam - new dates
- 02/08/2011: Pet Care Trade Association workshops on first aid and domestic poultry
- 10/05/2011: Webinars offer SQPs opportunities to gain CPD points before 30 June deadline
- 28/04/2011: Veterinary Medicines Regulations, Code and Guidance delayed
- 11/04/2011: The unexpected benefits of carrying your AMTRA SQP card
- 08/04/2011: AMTRA and AHDA CPD series to conclude in Northern Ireland
- 01/04/2011: AMTRA Council minutes published
- 30/03/2011: SCOPS Principles in Action for SQPs and vets - 5 May, Gloucestershire
- 16/03/2011: SQP Compendium
Distribution category review nears its end
VMD has today published a paper updating us on progress with the distribution category review.
The VPC reviewed 848 products and recommended 55 products for re-classification to a less restrictive distribution category while maintaining appropriate controls on the safe use of these medicines. Of these 55 products, there were 5 products where the VMD and MAH could not support the VPC’s recommendations to reclassification from NFA-VPS to AVM-GSL. These products treat worm infestations (including lungworm and/or giardia) where professional advice is needed for the safe use of the product and the VPC had recommended a category that did not require any professional advice.
The paper lists the products which were eventually recommended for reclassification. In most cases these represent changes from POM-V to POM-VPS or NFA-VPS and thus fresh opportunities for AMTRA SQPs (and pharmacists) to bring the benefits of these medicines to a wider audience.
Disappointingly, for some products, there will not be a change in classification as “the MAH [Marketing Authorisation Holder] declined to accept this opportunity”. This isn’t how I believe the review was originally envisaged by Professor Sir John Marsh and the Competition Commission, who noted that companies have always had the option to seek reclassification but often chose not to, it was believed partly to avoid upsetting existing customers.
Nevertheless, this does represent a significant new set of products available to SQPs (and pharmacists), and VMD are to be thanked for eventually seeing this long process through to conclusion. The medicines in question will become available as VPS products over an extended timescale (potentially up to several years in some cases) as companies reach their next label reprint - only when the label says POM-VPS or NFA-VPS should the product be regarded as such.