FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Pharmacists and pharmacies
Pharmacists can use AI, but the GPhC says they remain personally accountable for every decision it informs and must check what it produces. Because cover is compulsory under the Pharmacy Order, how your indemnity treats AI-assisted work is a registration issue as well as a claims issue.
Part of: AI in pharmacists and pharmacies
In short
AI is now used across pharmacy: clinical screening in patient medication record systems, dispensing automation, consultation notes, online questionnaires, medication review searches and hospital stewardship tools. The GPhC published its first position statement on AI on 20 April 2026. It creates no new standards but says existing standards apply at all times and that registrants stay personally accountable. Owners and superintendents have separate governance duties. Article 32 of the Pharmacy Order 2010 requires appropriate indemnity, with no minimum limit, and neither the GPhC statement nor its indemnity page mentions AI. That leaves the policy wording to decide how AI-assisted errors are treated.
AI can appear in every sector of pharmacy practice, often built into systems rather than chosen as a separate tool. Common uses include:
The GPhC position statement lists diagnosis and prescribing, clinical checks, operational tasks and transcribing patient notes as examples of AI use.
The General Pharmaceutical Council regulates pharmacists, pharmacy technicians and registered pharmacies in Great Britain under the Pharmacy Order 2010. It does not regulate AI tools; the MHRA regulates AI that is a medical device.
| Body | Publication | Status |
|---|---|---|
| GPhC | Position statement on AI in pharmacy (20 April 2026) | Applies existing, binding standards to AI |
| GPhC | AI in education and training (April 2026) | Guidance for education |
| GPhC and five other regulators | Joint statement on AI in professional education (February 2026) | Joint statement |
| PSA and the regulators it oversees | Joint Statement of Intent on AI (17 September 2026) | Commitment to future principles, no timetable |
| A pharmacists' defence association | Professional guidance on safe use of AI (24 August 2026) | Professional guidance |
| RCPharm | Policy statement on AI in pharmacy (January 2025) | Policy statement |
The GPhC statement says pharmacists must understand each tool's intended use, limitations and biases, be trained, check outputs, protect confidentiality, explain AI use to patients and seek consent where necessary, and raise concerns. The nine Standards for pharmacy professionals still apply, especially Standard 4 (knowledge and skills), Standard 5 (professional judgement) and Standard 7 (confidentiality). A pharmacists' defence association, as reported by the Pharmaceutical Journal, asks for extra care where AI makes recommendations, talks to patients, hides decision-making or changes clinical processes. The RCPharm statement, as reported by the Pharmaceutical Journal, says pharmacists need to become familiar with AI and need time to build skills.
The main risks for pharmacists are:
Article 32 of the Pharmacy Order 2010, substituted by SI 2014/1887, requires every practising registrant to have an indemnity arrangement which provides appropriate cover for the nature and extent of the risks. Failing to do so can lead to removal from the register or be treated as misconduct.
The GPhC indemnity page says employer cover does not exempt you and only covers the duties of that job; self-employed and locum work needs your own arrangement declaring your full scope of practice. There is no minimum limit, run-off should be considered, and owners must hold indemnity for the services they provide. Hospital pharmacists in NHS trusts are usually within CNST for clinical negligence, but state schemes do not cover fitness-to-practise matters. Neither the GPhC statement nor its indemnity page mentions AI, so how a policy treats AI-assisted errors depends on the wording. See pharmacists and indemnity: GPhC requirements explained.
The GPhC says it will keep its standards under review and has promised further AI work. The PSA principles have no date. The government accepted all 44 recommendations of the National Commission into the Regulation of AI in Healthcare, including a working group on professional responsibilities and NHS England and NHS Resolution guidance on indemnity (Rec 24), which is still pending. The defence association ran an AI member survey that closed on 20 September 2026, and follow-up work is expected. The automated decision rules in the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 have been fully in force since 5 February 2026, which matters for online pharmacies and patient-facing tools that make decisions without a pharmacist.
Each guide below covers one task or issue in more depth:
Apex arranges indemnity for pharmacists, locums and pharmacy owners. A broker reviews your cover against your full scope of practice and how your policy treats AI-assisted work; see also does PI cover AI mistakes and what to document about AI use.
No. The GPhC position statement of 20 April 2026 accepts that AI is used in practice, revalidation and education. It requires pharmacists to understand the tools, check outputs and stay personally accountable, and it forbids using AI in a way that risks harm or to falsify revalidation.
It may be for the duties of that job, but the GPhC says registrants must not assume employer arrangements are adequate. Locum, private and self-employed work needs your own arrangement, and regulatory defence is often outside employer and state schemes, so check what applies to you.
No. The GPhC sets no minimum limit. Cover should be sufficient to meet liabilities if a claim is made, reflect your full scope of practice and consider run-off for past work. If you use AI in higher-risk work such as prescribing, that is part of the scope you should declare.
Usually the pharmacist who acted on it is the first person pursued, with the owner or employer also exposed. The defence association has warned that pharmacists risk becoming liability sinks because AI cannot be registered or held legally liable. Supplier liability depends on contracts and is unsettled.
Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.
Start a PI quote Request a callbackApex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.
