AI in pharmacy: the GPhC's position, accountability and the registered pharmacy

Cue 1 A position statement dated April 2026 with its central sentence on personal accountability

EMMA 00:00 George, our dispensing system now flags interactions using AI. Has the regulator said anything?

GEORGE 00:05 Yes. The General Pharmaceutical Council published a position statement in April 2026. It covers practice, revalidation, and education and training.

EMMA 00:13 What's its position?

GEORGE 00:14 That pharmacists and pharmacy technicians are personally accountable for their professional practice, even when AI is being used. And must always be prepared to justify their decisions and actions.

Cue 2 A dispensing screen showing a suggestion, with the pharmacist's own check beside it

EMMA 00:26 So if the system misses an interaction?

GEORGE 00:29 The check was yours. The statement says AI should not replace clinical decision making and professional judgement.

EMMA 00:36 Hasn't the regulator approved the system?

GEORGE 00:38 No. It says it doesn't have a role in regulating AI tools or products, or in assessing their clinical safety or technical performance. Many AI products for healthcare are regulated as medical devices, by the MHRA.

Cue 3 Two regulators: one for the product as a medical device, one for the professional and the pharmacy

EMMA 00:52 So what does the regulator regulate?

GEORGE 00:55 You, and the pharmacy. If a concern's raised, it may investigate whether you appropriately used your professional judgement when using the tool.

EMMA 01:04 What does it expect of me, day to day?

GEORGE 01:07 Understand how the tool's intended to be used, its limitations and biases. Have the training for it. And review its outputs for accuracy, bias or misleading information.

Cue 4 Ten expectations on a card, with review, transparency and candour picked out

EMMA 01:18 And with patients?

GEORGE 01:19 Be transparent about your use of AI. Explain to patients how it's being used in their care, with the risks and benefits. And seek consent where necessary.

EMMA 01:30 Data?

GEORGE 01:30 Meet confidentiality and data protection requirements. Including reviewing how information is stored, used or shared.

Cue 5 A near miss being reported from one pharmacy and reaching the next

EMMA 01:36 And when it gets something wrong?

GEORGE 01:39 Raise it, in line with the duty of candour. A near miss you catch is one the next pharmacy won't catch unless somebody says so.

EMMA 01:49 Give me three things to know by Monday.

GEORGE 01:52 Which tools in your pharmacy use AI. What each is intended for. And who to tell when one is wrong.

Cue 1 Four folders on a pharmacy shelf: due diligence, governance, training, monitoring

EMMA 02:00 George, I own two pharmacies. What does the statement expect of me, as opposed to my pharmacists?

GEORGE 02:07 Four things, and it says you should be able to demonstrate them during pharmacy inspections.

EMMA 02:13 Go on.

GEORGE 02:14 One. Carry out due diligence, to make sure AI tools are safe, appropriate and used in line with their intended purpose.

Cue 2 An inspector being shown a training record and a dated review note

EMMA 02:22 Two.

GEORGE 02:22 Clear governance arrangements. Including risk assessments, data security, patient confidentiality and information governance.

EMMA 02:28 Three.

GEORGE 02:28 Suitable training, so staff understand the system and its limitations. And four. The tools are monitored and reviewed as part of routine quality and risk management.

Cue 3 A transcription tool drifting into dose advice, with a stop sign and a new assessment form

EMMA 02:38 What will an inspector actually ask for?

GEORGE 02:41 Evidence. The statement says inspectors will look at governance, staff competence, equipment, data protection and safety, when AI tools are being used.

EMMA 02:50 Meaning paper.

GEORGE 02:51 Meaning something you can show. The due diligence. A risk assessment. A training record for each person who uses the tool. And a note of when it was last reviewed.

Cue 4 A revalidation record written by the pharmacist, beside one generated whole and marked not appropriate

EMMA 03:03 We bought a tool to transcribe consultations. Staff have started asking it about doses.

GEORGE 03:08 Then it's outside its intended purpose, and outside what you assessed. A tool that drifts into a new use needs a new assessment.

EMMA 03:18 Different subject. Can my pharmacists use AI for revalidation?

GEORGE 03:21 The statement says it's not appropriate to use AI to create full revalidation submissions, or to falsify information. If they do, they may face further investigation.

Cue 5 A joint statement dated 17 September 2026 signed by a row of regulators, with a diary reminder every six months

EMMA 03:32 So no use at all?

GEORGE 03:34 It doesn't say that. If AI supports revalidation, it must be done in a responsible and transparent way. But the learning and the reflection have to be theirs.

EMMA 03:45 Is this the last word?

GEORGE 03:47 No. On 17 September 2026 the Professional Standards Authority and the regulators it oversees published a joint statement of intent. They've committed to develop high-level principles on regulating the use of AI by health and social care professionals.

EMMA 04:02 When?

GEORGE 04:02 No timetable was given. So re-read the regulator's AI page every six months. The position is new, and it'll move.