Roles of the non-medical prescribing leads within organisations across a Strategic Health Authority: perceived functions and factors supporting the role

Objectives Extending the roles of nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals to include prescribing has been identified as one way of improving service provision. In the UK, over 50 000 non-medical healthcare professionals are now qualified to prescribe. Implementation of non-medical prescribing ( NMP) is crucial to realise the potential return on investment. The UK Department of Health recommends a NMP lead to be responsible for the implementation of NMP within organisations. The aim of this study was to explore the role of NMP leads in organisations across one Strategic Health Authority (SHA) and to inform future planning with regards to the criteria for those adopting this role, the scope of the role and factors enabling the successful execution of the role. Methods Thirty-nine NMP leads across one SHA were approached. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted. Issues explored included the perceived role of the NMP lead, safety and clinical governance procedures and facilitators to the role. Transcribed audiotapes were coded and analysed using thematic analytical techniques. Key findings In total, 27/39 (69.2%) NMP leads were interviewed. The findings highlight the key role that the NMP lead plays with regards to the support and development of NMP within National Health Service trusts. Processes used to appoint NMP leads lacked clarity and varied between trusts. Only two NMP leads had designated or protected time for their role. Strategic influence, operational management and clinical governance were identified as key functions. Factors that supported the role included organisational support, level of influence and dedicated time. Conclusion The NMP lead plays a significant role in the development and implementation of NMP. Clear national guidance is needed with regards to the functions of this role, the necessary attributes for individuals recruited into this post and the time that should be designated to it. This is important as prescribing is extended to include other groups of non-medical healthcare professionals.

The role of the Hellenic food safety authority in Greece: implementation strategies

During the last 15 years, a series of food scares and crises (BSE, dioxin. foot and mouth disease) have seriously under-mined public confidence in food producers and operators and their capacity to produce safe food. As a result, food safety has become a top priority of the European legislative authorities and systems of national food control have been tightened up and have included the establishment of the European Food Safety Authority. In Greece a law creating the Hellenic Food Safety Authority has been approved. The main objectives of this Authority are to promote the food security to consumers and inform them of any changes or any development in the food and health sector. The paper reviews the general structure of the current food control system in Greece. It describes the structure and the mission of the Hellenic Food Safety Authority and explains the strategy to carry out inspections and the analysis of the preliminary results of such inspections. Details are also given of the personnel training and certification and accreditation standards to be met by the Authority by the end of 2004. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The design of probiotic studies to substantiate health claims

The EC Regulation No. 1924/2006 on Nutrition and Health claims made on foods has generated considerable debate and concern among scientists and industry. At the time of writing, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has not approved any probiotic claims despite numerous human trials and meta-analyses showing evidence of beneficial effects. On 29th and 30th September 2010, ten independent, academic scientists with a documented record in probiotic research, met to discuss designs for future probiotic studies to demonstrate health benefits for gut and immune function. The expert panel recommended the following: (i) always formulate a precise and concrete hypothesis, and appropriate goals and parameters before starting a trial; (ii) ensure trials have sufficient sample size, such that they are adequately powered to reach statistically significant conclusions, either supporting or rejecting the a priori hypothesis, taking into account adjustment for multiple testing (this might necessitate more than one recruitment site); (iii) ensure trials are of appropriate duration; (iv) focus on a single, primary objective and only evaluate multiple parameters when they are hypothesis-driven. The panel agreed that there was an urgent need to better define which biomarkers are considered valuable for substantiation of a health claim. As a first step, the panel welcomed the publication on the day of the meeting of EFSA's draft guidance document on immune and gut health, although it came too late for study designs and dossiers to be adjusted accordingly. New validated biomarkers need to be identified in order to properly determine the range of physiological functions influenced by probiotics. In addition, validated biomarkers reflecting risk factors for disease, are required for article 14 claims (EC Regulation No. 1924/2006). Finally, the panel concluded that consensus among scientists is needed to decide appropriate clinical endpoints for trials.