Clinical Rx can offer support across a range of areas related to prescription review and medication management. Not only can this make your practice more efficient and free up doctors for more serious cases, but it is fully reimbursable from ARRS funding.
How does ARRS funding work?
ARRS stands for the Additional Roles Reimbursement Scheme. This scheme was launched by the government in 2019 to help Primary Care Networks (PCNs) recruit more personnel for interdisciplinary teams. The aim was to ensure that patients had access to a wider range of medical professionals who could provide for a more diverse array of needs. Additional roles covered by the scheme could include physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dieticians, paramedics, podiatrists, children and young people’s mental health practitioners, care coordinators, clinical pharmacists and more.
Which additional roles are needed will depend on the PCN and the population it serves. For example, whether you would benefit from a specialist in children’s mental health will depend on the number of children in your area. Recognising this, ARRS funding comes with flexibility regarding the number and type of roles provided. For many PCNs, clinical pharmacists will be a particularly efficient way to spend the money, as the prescribing of medication is an essential part of general practice, one that will be accessed by the vast majority of patients at some point.
What services does Clinical Rx provide?
In general, clinical pharmacists exist to help with the management of medication. They ensure patients receive the correct prescription, that it works as intended, that potential side effects are monitored, that their dosage is adjusted as needed, and that reviews are carried out as necessary. This is of particular use for those with chronic conditions who require long term management, and who are particularly reliant on the ongoing support of their GP practice.
Utilisation of clinical pharmacists allows the practice as a whole to work more efficiently, ensuring doctors can focus on more complex diagnoses and treatments, and it improves the patient experience by providing them with quicker and more tailored care. Increased efficiency in time, organisation and costs ensures ARRS funding is put to good use, to the benefit of a practice or entire PCN.
There are several benefits to utilising the services of Clinical Rx, in particular, which works as a remote clinical pharmacist provider supporting a range of PCNs and practices as needed on a flexible basis. As well as streamlining prescription management and reviews, relieving pressure on GPs, and improving patient care, it can clear the backlog and help meet QOF targets. Meeting QOF targets, in particular, allows you to be rewarded for good performance, increasing your practice income. This makes ARRS funding a profitable investment as well as one that is effective in terms of patient outcomes.
It can be a difficult decision to decide how best to use ARRS funding, but Clinical Rx can provide specific benefits for patients and doctors both in terms of efficiency and cost effectiveness. This leads to better outcomes for everyone in the PCN or practice, and for the PCN or practice itself.
For improved outcomes, we believe that communication is vital between the different professions. At Clinical Rx®, we welcome feedback and reviews, so we can continue to offer the best possible service. By working together, the team can better address the complex needs of patients, improve outcomes, and enhance the overall patient experience. Ultimately, the goal is to provide high-quality care in a collaborative and patient-centred approach.Â
Our Pharmacists are not limited to medication management only. We understand that every GP Practice has different needs at times. Whether it be assistance with protocols, quality improvement work or additional work for CQC inspections – we can help, contact us for more information.Â
References: 1. Duncan, P. et al. (2020) ‘Barriers and enablers to collaborative working between GPS and Pharmacists: A qualitative interview study’, British Journal of General Practice, 70(692). doi:10.3399/bjgp20x708197.
