Short Communication - (2025) Volume 14, Issue 3
Received: 03-May-2025, Manuscript No. pbt-25-167747;
Editor assigned: 05-May-2025, Pre QC No. P-167747;
Reviewed: 19-May-2025, QC No. Q-167747;
Revised: 24-May-2025, Manuscript No. R-167747;
Published:
31-May-2025
, DOI: 10.37421/2167-7689.2025.14.488
Citation: Gerogiannis, Coulibaly. “Pharmaceutical Ethics in the Age of Automation and Remote Dispensing.” Pharmaceut Reg Affairs 14 (2025): 488.
Copyright: © 2025 Gerogiannis C. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
The rise of automation and remote dispensing technologies is transforming the pharmaceutical landscape, offering faster, more efficient services and expanding access in underserved regions. From robotic dispensing units in hospitals to mail-order prescriptions and AI-assisted drug verification systems, automation promises enhanced accuracy, reduced labor costs and optimized workflows. Remote dispensing models are especially beneficial in rural or low-access communities, enabling patients to receive medications without having to travel long distances [1].
However, while these technological advances offer clear logistical benefits, they also raise complex ethical questions. Key concerns include the erosion of the pharmacistâ??patient relationship, data privacy risks, algorithmic bias and the potential for reduced human oversight in clinical decision-making. The shift from personal interaction to digital transaction challenges the professionâ??s longstanding commitment to individualized care and therapeutic communication. As the pharmacy profession becomes increasingly digitized, it is essential to ensure that ethical principles-autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice-remain central to practice and policy decisions [2].
The integration of automation in pharmaceutical care compels a reevaluation of the pharmacistâ??s role and the standards by which ethical care is delivered. Traditional pharmacy practice emphasizes personal engagement, clinical judgment and patient counselling-qualities that risk being diminished in highly automated settings. For example, robotic dispensing systems can accurately fill prescriptions, but they do not assess a patientâ??s understanding of the regimen or identify nuanced adherence barriers. Ethical questions arise when efficiency is prioritized over patient engagement, especially for vulnerable populations who may lack digital literacy or require tailored guidance. Furthermore, remote dispensing models often rely on digital communication channels, which may not be suitable for patients with sensory, cognitive, or language barriers. The ethical challenge lies in balancing innovation with equity: ensuring that the introduction of new technologies does not deepen health disparities. Pharmacy professionals and institutions must critically assess which functions can be safely automated and which require human touchpoints to preserve quality, compassion and ethical responsibility in care delivery [3].
Automation and AI-driven technologies also raise concerns about the safeguarding of patient data and the transparency of decision-making processes. Remote dispensing platforms collect vast amounts of health information, often linked to electronic health records and third-party vendors. This creates ethical obligations around data privacy, informed consent and cyber-security. Patients must understand how their data will be used, who will access it and what safeguards are in place to prevent misuse. AI tools that assist in medication reviews or risk prediction must be transparent and explainable, so that healthcare professionals and patients can trust their recommendations. Algorithmic bias presents another ethical dilemma, particularly when tools are trained on datasets that do not reflect diverse patient populations. Biased algorithms could inadvertently contribute to unequal care, with marginalized groups receiving inappropriate or delayed treatment. It is the responsibility of healthcare organizations, pharmacists and technology developers to conduct thorough audits and implement bias-mitigation strategies to ensure fairness and clinical integrity in automated systems [4].
As remote dispensing expands, the question of accountability becomes increasingly complex. In traditional pharmacy settings, a licensed pharmacist is present to oversee dispensing, address patient queries and intervene when necessary. With remote models, particularly those operating across states or national borders, it becomes less clear who holds ethical and legal responsibility in the event of an error. What happens when a remote dispensing machine malfunctions, or when a patient suffers harm due to a miscommunication via digital interface? Establishing clear accountability frameworks is essential to uphold patient safety and professional standards. Regulatory bodies must adapt to the evolving landscape by issuing guidelines that define the pharmacistâ??s role in virtual environments and set expectations for oversight and intervention. Ethics committees, too, must weigh in on these emerging issues to ensure that patient welfare remains paramount. Ultimately, ethical pharmaceutical practice in the digital age will depend on robust governance, interdisciplinary collaboration and a steadfast commitment to the patient as the focal point of care [5].
Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at
Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at
Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at
Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at
Google Scholar Cross Ref Indexed at
Pharmaceutical Regulatory Affairs: Open Access received 533 citations as per Google Scholar report
