Pharmacy technicians are the backbone of health systems, yet their training and retention remain inconsistent. A lack of standardized programs forces hospitals to rely on ad-hoc solutions, which slows down workflows and limits technician growth. The problem isn’t just hiring—it’s keeping skilled workers once they’re on board. Without accredited pathways, technicians often leave for better opportunities, leaving gaps in medication distribution and clinical support. Workforce readiness begins with structured development, as technicians are essential to daily operations, yet recruitment, education, and retention remain persistent challenges across health systems. Structured and accredited training programs can help organizations build a more consistent workforce while creating meaningful opportunities for professional growth.
Structured and accredited training programs could fix this. They would create a pipeline of qualified staff while giving technicians clearer career paths. The result? Pharmacists could spend more time on patient care instead of managing day-to-day operations. Investing in technicians also strengthens the broader pharmacy enterprise by allowing pharmacists to focus on clinical care, medication management, and collaboration with patients and care teams. But progress depends on health systems treating technicians as long-term investments, not just temporary labor.
Regulatory Barriers Hindering Pharmacist Roles
Pharmacists themselves face regulatory hurdles that limit their expanded roles. In some states, they’ve gained authority to prescribe controlled substances—but federal rules still block them from fully exercising that power. The Drug Enforcement Administration’s registration process, designed decades ago, doesn’t account for modern state-level authority.
In 2025, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists and other pharmacy organizations formally petitioned the DEA to update its registration process to better reflect state laws, citing how outdated rules create unnecessary friction for providers trying to meet patient needs. The mismatch between state and federal policies isn’t just a bureaucratic annoyance. It forces pharmacists to handle conflicting guidelines, which can delay care or force them to work in legal gray areas. These experiences highlight how regulatory processes directly affect pharmacy practice, creating operational and clinical barriers that can hinder timely patient access to treatment.
Preparing for the 340B Rebate Changes
Health systems also need to prepare for financial shifts like the 340B Rebate Model Pilot Program, which takes effect in January 2027. The program changes how hospitals receive rebates on certain drugs, requiring coordination across pharmacy, finance, and supply chain teams. For covered entities, responding to this change will demand collaboration not only between pharmacy, finance, and contracting but also with technology and revenue cycle teams. Missteps could mean lost revenue or compliance risks. The challenge isn’t just adjusting to new rules—it’s ensuring every department understands the impact before the deadline hits.
Cell and Gene Therapy Rollout Challenges
Cell and gene therapies are the next frontier, but their rollout demands more than clinical expertise. A recent report tracked 4,487 therapies in development, spanning oncology, rare diseases, and now neurological, metabolic, and cardiovascular conditions. Beyond oncology and rare diseases, the pipeline now extends to immunological, musculoskeletal, sensory, and infectious disease applications, including programs targeting osteoarthritis, type 1 diabetes, Parkinson’s disease, lupus, and heart failure. By mid-2026, investors had poured over $500 million into early-stage projects alone. The shift from experimental treatments to mainstream care will strain existing workflows, pharmacies, labs, and supply chains weren’t built for therapies that require ultra-cold storage, precise dosing, and long-term monitoring.
Related Post: Pharmacists Brace for New Lipid Drug Landscape
Pharmacists are uniquely positioned to bridge these gaps. Their role spans clinical decision-making and operational logistics, from drug acquisition to patient education. Their ability to connect clinical and operational responsibilities makes them critical to integrating therapies across multiple disciplines, including pharmacy, nursing, physicians, laboratories, supply chain, finance, IT, quality, and payer partners. But success depends on cross-department collaboration. A gene therapy program, for instance, needs pharmacy, nursing, IT, and finance teams aligned on everything from storage protocols to billing codes. Without that coordination, even the most promising treatments could stall at implementation.
AI’s Promise and Limits in Pharmacy
Technology, especially AI—could ease some of that complexity. Early adopters are using AI to streamline medication management, flag potential drug interactions, and reduce administrative workload. Emerging evidence suggests that while AI reduces administrative burden, most health care investments in AI remain concentrated on efficiency rather than patient outcomes, access, or equity. Yet most investments focus on back-office efficiency rather than direct patient care. The risk? Health systems gain speed without addressing the core issue: how to pay for the human work that still matters most.
Consider clinical pharmacists in primary care. After states recognized them as providers, reimbursement for their services rose, but only because policy changes opened new payment pathways. Research shows that while AI cuts paperwork, it hasn’t yet improved access or equity in clinical services. Separate research found that billing and reimbursement for clinical pharmacist services increased after pharmacists received formal recognition as providers, showing how strongly clinical practice remains connected to policy and payment structures. Without similar adjustments, AI-driven automation might just shift workloads elsewhere, leaving gaps in patient navigation or follow-up care. The solution isn’t to abandon technology, but to pair it with governance that ensures clinical roles aren’t left behind.
These challenges aren’t theoretical. They’re already playing out in pharmacies, clinics, and hospital labs across the country. The question isn’t whether health systems are ready for the next generation of care, it’s whether they’ve built the foundations to handle it. Progress in medicine is often measured by what becomes possible for patients, but realizing that potential also depends on whether the people, processes, technology, and resources are ready to support it safely. Right now, the answer varies by facility. Some are investing in training, policy alignment, and cross-team collaboration. Others are still reacting to changes as they happen.
The difference will determine which systems thrive, and which struggle to keep up.
