Talk:Pharmacy technician

Pharmacology High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupations (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles

re: labcoats

i see that unnecessary. all employees behind a pharmacy counter, regardless of Chain, Store, or Independent are required to wear coats or name tags that identify them of their job title. I have a white lab coat, wear a tie to work, and the coat is embroidered with my name a CPhT - Lead Pharmacy Technician. In this situation EVERYONE, the store and the employee were breaking the law in not having him wear clear identification that he was a pharmacy tech and not a pharmacist.

If

If anyone was wondering, I've removed every "f**k" word present in this article and basically reverted back to the older edit made by the antivandalbot.Maht1 17:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)maht1[reply]

Thanks.

On the job experience not mandatory for certification by PTCB.

I attended evening CPhT preparation classes, I passed class at the equivalent of 90%, I subsequently passed the PTCE, I am currently a CPhT, I am employed as an entry level pharm tech. Before the prep classes, I had no pharmacy experience, aside from being a consumer/patient.

In my opinion, classroom training without actual measurable skills training (at the least), or, preferably, on the job training, is a weak situation. I believe that there is good sense behind how so MANY other trades will not let you advance to a new level (certification) without documented experience. Why did I do it? Because I had to choose a new career, and obtaining CPhT certification did NOT require experience, a double win for me, I guess. I'll have experience soon enough, since local pharmacies are, for the most part, not requiring CPhT as a condition of employment.

My manager, an RPh, thinks certification 'isn't worth it' and 'doesn't make for a better employee'. Other pharmacists echo his sentiment of certification not making for a better employee. He employs 4 or 5 CPhTs, myself included, so his view is not based solely om my performance.

While I hope to gain the experience needed to alter my managers perceptions of a CPhT, I also understand his view that he sees little difference between certified and uncertified.

From what I've experienced on my job, I'd say CPhT should remain a separate topic, but possibly merge all pharmacy technician certification into a single separate topic.

Whether on the job training should (or should not) be mandated prior to certification, I leave discussion of that subject to another venue. mmmmna (talk) 01:05, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links

External links on Wikipedia are supposed to be "encyclopedic in nature" and useful to a worldwide audience. Please read the external links policy (and perhaps the specific rules for medicine-related articles) before adding more external links.

The following kinds of links are inappropriate:

Online discussion groups or chat forums
Personal webpages and blogs
Multiple links to the same website
Websites that are recruiting for clinical trials
Websites that are selling things (e.g., books or memberships)

I realize that some links are helpful to certain people, but they still do not comply with Wikipedia policy, and therefore must not be included in the article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

Since CPhT was orphaned, and both articles need major reworking, I'm merging CPhT into the Training and certification section. Filpaul (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Pharmacy technician. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:01, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]