An international comparison of the continuing professional development process (CPD) in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom

Background: The Pharmacy Board of Australia stipulated that for renewal of registration, pharmacists must have accrued a minimum of 20 CPD credits over the 2010-11 registration years (1). Mandatory CPD is not new in Pharmacy. The UK and New Zealand have both established systems of CPD in recent years. The purpose of this study is to investigate established CPD processes in the UK and New Zealand with the view to making recommendations for the implementation of the CPD process in Australia. Objectives: To compare the acquisition and guidance on documentation of CPD credit points in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Methodology: A comparative online search of the websites of each of the registering authorities was undertaken. Any practice standards or guidelines which relate to registration or continuing professional development were analysed and compared. Results: In New Zealand the Pharmacy Council require Pharmacists to have a minimum of 12 outcome credits over a 3-year period for recertification (2, 3). The outcome credit related to each CPD action and is based on relevance to the pharmacist and their practice. It is graded between one, for CPD which has occasional relevance to practice and three which have considerable relevance to practice. There are examples of completed CPD recording sheets on their website (8). In the UK, The General Pharmaceutical Council require Pharmacists to make a minimum of nine CPD entries per year (4) and detailed guidance on how to record CPD activities is provided (5,7). The Pharmacy Board of Australia divides CPD activities into three groups (6). Of the 20 credits required annually only 10 can be gained from group one activities, which is information accessed without assessment. There is only brief guidance on the recording of CPD. Discussion: The GPhC in the UK provided the most comprehensive guidance on acquisition of CPD credit points and documentation (5,7) The Pharmacy Council of New Zealand made CPD points relevant to practice.(2,8) The Pharmacy Board of Australia provided limited information for pharmacists on CPD activities, which may impede pharmacist participation. Information may assist in increasing pharmacists’ engagement in CPD activities. In conclusion, there is variation between the three countries in the amount and type of information provided about CPD requirements.