Background: Pharmacy technicians are increasingly involved in immunization services, enhancing vaccine accessibility and reducing pharmacies’ workload. This scoping review aims to (1) provide a comprehensive overview of pharmacy technicians’ involvement in immunization services across various healthcare settings and countries, and (2) conduct a comparative analysis of training curricula for pharmacy technicians on immunization. Methods: A scoping review was conducted following the Arksey and O’Malley framework. A comprehensive search of the PubMed and Scopus databases was performed using keywords and MeSH terms such as “pharmacy technician(s)”, “immunization”, “vaccination”, “role”, and “involvement”. Studies included assessed pharmacy technicians’ roles in vaccine administration, training, and public health outcomes. Descriptive and thematic analyses were used to synthesize the findings. In addition, a supplementary analysis of immunization training curricula was conducted, reviewing programs from different countries to identify similarities, differences, and gaps in course structure, content, and delivery formats. Lastly, a comprehensive toolkit was developed, offering guidelines intended to facilitate the implementation of immunization training programs. Results: A total of 35 articles met the inclusion criteria, primarily from the United States of America (n = 30), Canada (n = 2), Ethiopia (n = 1), Denmark (n = 1) and United Kingdom (n = 1). The findings indicate that pharmacy technicians contribute significantly to vaccine administration, patient education, and workflow optimization, particularly in community pharmacies. The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated their involvement in immunization programs. Key challenges include regulatory barriers, a lack of standardized training, and resistance from other healthcare professionals. Facilitators include legislative support (e.g., the PREP Act), structured training programs, and collaborative pharmacist–technician models. Conclusions: Pharmacy technicians can play a vital role in expanding immunization services, improving vaccine uptake, and reducing pharmacist workload. Addressing regulatory inconsistencies, enhancing training, and fostering interprofessional collaboration are crucial for their effective integration of immunization programs. Since immunization by pharmacy technicians is not yet allowed in many EU countries, this review will provide a foundational basis to address their potential to support the healthcare workforce and improve access to immunization services.

Introduction Health inequalities can occur where there are differences in how people are treated with respect to their race and ethnicity. Disparities and systemic inequities in healthcare have led to negative outcomes. Pain management is an area where there are perceived health inequalities. Medicines optimisation is a framework for healthcare provider interventions under four principles to ensure that medicines are used safely and effectively, producing the best possible outcomes for patients. Using this framework allows a systematic and theory-informed identification of areas of care at risk of disparities. Aim The aim was to assess disparities associated with race and ethnicity in pain management, mapped to the medicines optimisation framework. Method Electronic databases CINAHL, Ovid and Medline were searched from 2012 to 2025. Studies involving pain management, medicine optimisation, ethnicity, ethnic minorities and race were included. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts. Data were extracted on evidence relating to the application of the four principles of medicines optimisation, and for the presence or absence of disparities in pain management overall. Results One hundred and eighteen studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Eighty-nine (75%) identified pain management disparities in respect to race and ethnicity, with the majority of disparities related to medicine optimisation principle 2 (evidenced based medicine). Disparities identified were discrepancies in the reporting of pain scores, time to pain and pain assessment and discrepancies in the receipt of opioids across all races. Other disparities were, inconsistencies with prescriptions issued at discharge or outpatients, patients’ dissatisfaction with pain management. There were less disparities observed in studies that involved children, when managing surgical pain and pain in palliative care and when protocols were used in the management of pain. Conclusion Disparities in pain management associated with patient race and ethnicity are prevalent have decreased over the past decade. Healthcare professionals should seek to understand the patient experience and incorporate protocols/guidelines into their care to promote evidence-based medicine. Further research in wider geographies is required, particularly in medication safety and incorporating medicines optimisation into routine care.