Peer discussion in practice: experiences of pharmacy technicians in the participation of revalidation for registration

As the pharmacy technician role continues to evolve across pharmacy sectors in Great Britain, professional revalidation is a key mechanism for ensuring ongoing competence and reflective practice. One component of the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) revalidation process, peer discussion, offers an opportunity for pharmacy technicians to engage in meaningful conversations about their practice. However, little is known about how this group experience peer discussion, what value they derive from it and what support they need to participate effectively. Understanding these experiences is essential to shaping future guidance and adopting a culture of reflective learning within the pharmacy workforce.
This study explores the experiences of pharmacy technicians participating in peer discussion as part of the GPhC revalidation process. It examines how they perceive its value, the strategies they use to identify suitable peers and the types of support considered beneficial for meaningful engagement. Guided by an interpretivist paradigm, the research employs a qualitative methodology comprising of an online survey, which gathered 325 responses, and one-to-one online interviews with nine participants from across Great Britain and the three key pharmacy sectors.
Following thematic analysis, three overarching themes were identified. The first, Fostering Meaningful Discussions, explored how natural interactions were translated into structured reflections, how outcomes were synergised and how engagement was navigated. The second, Strategic Peer Selection for Meaningful Discussion, encompassed intrinsic motivations and extrinsic influences shaping peer choice. The third, Navigating the Landscape of Peer Discussions, addressed procedural ambiguities, the evolving nature of peer discussions and the role-specific challenges.
Findings suggest that while peer discussions are widely valued, pharmacy technicians often encounter uncertainty around peer selection and procedural clarity. In response, the study recommends clearly defining the purpose of peer discussion as a tool for reflective practice and professional development alongside flexible implementation and tailored guidance to support confident, context-sensitive engagement.