BILL ANALYSIS
AB 418
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 28, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS
Mary Hayashi, Chair
AB 418 (Emmerson) - As Amended: April 13, 2009
SUBJECT : Pharmacy technicians: licensure requirements.
SUMMARY : Requires a pharmacy technician (PT) applicant to pass
a national PT examination for licensure. Specifically, this
bill :
1)Eliminates the option for a PT to obtain licensure by
certification by the PT Certification Board.
2)Requires an applicant to pass a PT examination recognized by
the National Organization for Competency Assurance and
approved by the Pharmacy Board (board).
3)Requires the board to adopt regulations for PT training
courses.
4)Is scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2013.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the Pharmacy Law, which provides for the licensure
and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacy technicians by the
board.
2)Authorizes the board to issue a PT license to an individual if
that individual is a high school graduate or possesses a
general educational development certificate equivalent and has
either obtained a specified associate's degree, completed a
specified course of training, graduated from a specified
school of pharmacy, or is certified by the PT Certification
Board.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
AB 418
Page 2
Purpose of this bill . According to the author's office,
"Pharmacists rely heavily on pharmacy technicians so that they
may optimally perform tasks to protect and provide for
Californians in need of prescriptions. Unfortunately, there is
a shortage of licensed pharmacists in California and an ever
increasing amount of patients as the population grows. As there
is no single standard for PT training and licensure beyond being
a high school graduate or having an equivalent degree, pharmacy
technicians have a broad range of minimum competencies,
experience, education, and training. Such varied levels of
training in combination with the ever increasing pharmacist
workload places patients at undue risk of medication errors."
Background . According to a 2003 workforce analysis by the
Center for Health Professions (CHF) at the University of
California, San Francisco, the PT profession is experiencing
rapid change, mirroring changes in the pharmacy profession and
in pharmaceutical treatment. PTs arose from the U.S. military
classification, "pharmacy specialists" developed in the
mid-1940s. Between 1968 and 1975, the U.S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare and professional pharmacy associations
studied and defined tasks and roles that could be played by
technicians, and established, in 1975, the American Society of
Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) education guidelines for
hospital pharmacy technicians. These guidelines were formalized
in 1982 as accreditation standards. Between 1994 and 1996, a
national task force completed a task analysis of technician jobs
and reported findings and recommendations advocating uniform
national education and training standards. In 1997, several
national associations collaborated to write the ASHP Model
Curriculum.
PTs operating in hospital and retail pharmacies are typically
responsible for maintaining inventory, preparing unit-dose
packaging, packaging and labeling, entering prescription
information and checking patients' profile information, and
various clerical duties. California law prohibits PTs from
performing any task requiring a pharmacist's professional
judgment. PTs work closely with pharmacists, and in a 2002
summit on the profession, pharmacists indicated that their
attitudes about working with technicians have become more
favorable in recent years: many considered technicians an asset
and supported developing the profession through improved
training and education. However, the CHF study noted that the
more stringent requirements will likely have a significant
AB 418
Page 3
impact on training and recruiting PTs, since historically, most
technicians have trained on-the-job. The California Labor
Market Information Division projects a 39.8% increase in
pharmacy technician positions in California through 2010.
This bill is primarily supported by hospital-based PT
organizations. A majority of larger chain drug store operators
are in opposition because they currently provide supplementary
onsite PT training to ensure competency in the retail setting.
These operators are concerned that additional qualifications
would create a barrier to entry, complicating their ability to
attracted qualified personnel. The chain drugstores argue that
hospitals are free to establish additional training requirements
if they feel current practices are insufficient to the hospital
environment.
Arguments in support . Health Care Patient Advocates write,
"Without standardization [of PT licensure], the continued
problems that result in potential or actual harm will remain.
Health Care Patient Advocates believes that the root cause of
these potential or actual negative outcomes is the variety of
training programs that are available?. We believe that
standardization is needed and evidenced by the increasing
numbers of elderly individuals, the introduction of new
medications for administration, as well as our rapidly changing
health care system."
Arguments in opposition . The California Retailers Association
and the National Association of Chain Drug Stores state, "AB 418
- as amended - would still significantly and unnecessarily alter
the training and certification procedures for pharmacy
technicians. While the stated goal of AB 418 is admirable, the
fact is that no safety issues have been identified in California
related to the training of pharmacy technicians?. It should be
noted that, by definition, PTs cannot be responsible for medical
errors. Pharmacy technicians can only perform non-discretionary
tasks. It is the pharmacist who is responsible for checking the
work of the PT and the pharmacist who is charged with protecting
patient safety."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Society of Health System Pharmacists (sponsor)
American Society of Health-System Pharmacists
AB 418
Page 4
American University of Health Sciences
California Hospital Association
California Society of Health System Pharmacists, Central Valley
Chapter
California Society of Health System Pharmacists, Pacific Student
Chapter
California Society of Health System Pharmacists, San Gabriel
Valley Chapter
California Society of Health System Pharmacists, Western
University Chapter
Diablo Chapter of the California Society of Health System
Pharmacists
Golden Gate Society of Health System Pharmacists
Health Care Patient Advocates
Inland Society of Health System Pharmacists
Loma Linda Student Chapter, Society of Health System Pharmacists
Mothers Against Medical Error
Orange County Society of Health System Pharmacists
Sacramento Valley Society of Health System Pharmacists
San Diego Society of Health System Pharmacists
San Fernando Valley Society of Health System Pharmacists
Sierra Society of Health System Pharmacists
Society of Health System Pharmacists, Student Chapter Society,
Touro
South Bay/Long Beach - Society of Health System Pharmacists
Southern California Society of Health System Pharmacists
The Quaid Foundation
University of California, San Diego Student Chapter, Society of
Health System Pharmacists
University of California, San Francisco Student Chapter, Society
of Health System Pharmacists
University of Southern California Society of Health System
Pharmacists
Numerous individuals
Opposition
California Association of Private Postsecondary Schools (CAPPS)
California Labor Federation
California Retailers Association
CVS/Caremark
National Association of Chain Drug Stores
Rite Aid
Target
United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Western States Council
Walgreens
AB 418
Page 5
Analysis Prepared by : Sarah Huchel / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301