January 2012 - Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals
January 2012 - Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals
January 2012 - Sandwell & West Birmingham Hospitals
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
SWBTB (1/12) 275 (b)<br />
SWBTM (1/12) 236<br />
DOCUMENT TITLE:<br />
SPONSORING DIRECTOR:<br />
AUTHOR:<br />
TRUST MANAGEMENT BOARD<br />
Patient Satisfaction Survey results for September – November<br />
2011<br />
Rachel Overfield, Chief Nurse<br />
Rachel Overfield, Chief Nurse<br />
DATE OF MEETING: 17 <strong>January</strong> <strong>2012</strong><br />
SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS:<br />
The attached report provides results of the Trust’s Adult Inpatient Satisfaction Survey for<br />
September – November 2011.<br />
Key Points To Note:<br />
• Numbers of surveys returned in November were higher than the rest of the year and<br />
amounts to around 38% of total discharges in the month.<br />
• Against 5 CQUiN questions very little change although divisions should be looking to<br />
improve scores against:<br />
- Involving patients in care decisions<br />
- Informing patients of medication side effects<br />
- Post discharge contact advice.<br />
• Care as rated by patients – 87% patients rate care as excellent or good – an increase of<br />
around 2% from the previous month.<br />
• 78.5% patients would recommend the Trust to friends/relatives – see appendix 1 regarding<br />
the definition of a net promoter score – a more sophisticated version will be incorporated<br />
when surveys next go to reprint.<br />
• Access to interpreters has improved following a considerable drive at ward level.<br />
• 8.3% patients claim that they shared sleeping accommodation with patients of the<br />
opposite sex. This is at odds with our breach reports and therefore needs urgent<br />
clarification at divisional level – every division has data down to ward level. (See Appendix<br />
2 for information by ward).<br />
• At least a quarter of patients consistently do not know the name of their consultant (see<br />
appendix 2 for information by ward).<br />
• Perceptions of standards of cleanliness has deteriorated for the third month running.<br />
• Noise at night, pain control and involvement in discharge planning continue to be a<br />
concern which we will bring to TMB next month by ward.<br />
• Keeping patients informed during transfers is a deteriorating picture – possibly due to<br />
increased pressures during the winter.<br />
• Discussing of dietary needs and choice remains a concern.<br />
• Waiting for medications continues to be the most significant reason given by patients for<br />
delays in going home (250 patients) – (see appendix 2 for detail by ward.)<br />
In the main report on page 8, 9 and 10 is a by ward performance monitoring table that identifies<br />
returns as a % of discharges; overall care ratings and hospital recommendation by ward. Within<br />
this N3 and D47 stand out as being of some concern (this correlates with other ward<br />
performance indicators).<br />
TMB is asked to consider key points and especially to encourage greater detailed divisional<br />
reviews to improve patient perception and experience.<br />
Page 1