Standard Reporting Template
NHS England (Wessex)
2014/15 Patient Participation Enhanced Service – Reporting Template Practice Name: Charlton Hill Surgery
Practice Code: J82025
Signed on behalf of practice: Adrian Wise Date: 16 January 2015
Signed on behalf of PPG: Peter Sabastian Date: 16 January 2015
1. Prerequisite of Enhanced Service – Develop/Maintain a Patient Participation Group (PPG)
Does the Practice have a PPG? YES
Method of engagement with PPG: Face to face,
Detail the gender mix of practice population and PPG:
% Male Female
Practice 48.8% 51.2%
PRG 54.5% 45.5%
Detail of age mix of practice population and PPG:
% <16 17-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 > 75 Practice 19.2
%
9.0% 10.6% 13.3% 17.7% 12.0% 10.4% 7.6%
PRG 0% 0% 9.1% 0% 9.1% 45.5% 9.1% 27.3%
Detail the ethnic background of your practice population and PRG:
White Mixed/ multiple ethnic groups
British Irish Gypsy or Irish traveller Other white White &black Caribbean White &black African White &Asian Other mixed Practice 91.5% 0.1% 0% 3.8% 0% 0% 0% 0% PRG 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Asian/Asian British Black/African/Caribbean/Black British Other Indian Pakistani Bangladeshi Chinese Other
Asian
African Caribbean Other Black
Arab Any other
Practice 0.3% 0% 0% 0% 0.3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
PRG 0% 0% 0% 0% 0.0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Ethnicity not stated or refused 4.0%
Describe steps taken to ensure that the PPG is representative of the practice population in terms of gender, age and ethnic background and other members of the practice population:
All patients invited. Notices of meeting dates on website, waiting room and twitter @CharltonHill1 Patients from unrepresented groups (age, ethnicity and others) also opportunistically invited by GPs
Are there any specific characteristics of your practice population which means that other groups should be included in the PPG? e.g. a large student population, significant number of jobseekers, large numbers of nursing homes, or a LGBT community? NO If you have answered yes, please outline measures taken to include those specific groups and whether those measures were successful:
2. Review of patient feedback
Outline the sources of feedback that were reviewed during the year:
Questionnaires to patients. Questionnaire design approved by PPG. Four different questionnaires covering different areas of the business. Questionnaires distributed October through to December to patients visiting the surgery.
How frequently were these reviewed with the PRG?
3. Action plan priority areas and implementation
Priority area 1
Description of priority area:
Patient Information Prompts on Electronic Check In System.
To try and make better use of the patient check in system with information prompts. These could be informing patients what the average wait time to see the clinician might be, to notifying patients if a student is likely to be present.
What actions were taken to address the priority?
Average wait time and number of patients waiting has been activated. Staff training is required to be able to make use of other functionality.
Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):
The first part of this has been achieved. Patients are now able to see how long the average wait time for the clinician is and also the number of patients in front of them who have not yet been called. This should have a positive impact on the patients
experience. This is publicised when patients check in using the automated check in screen. If patients check in at the front desk then this information is not available.
Priority area 2
Description of priority area: Magazines
It is clear that the selection of magazines does not meet patient’s needs. Although the majority said that their needs were met the comments received were far from complimentary. They are tatty, out of date and the range is somewhat limited. It was discussed as to whether the practice should subscribe to receive magazines each month (there are companies that sell the previous months overruns). However, the decision was made to remove all the magazines for a limited period to see what patient feedback was. It was noted that many patients play on their phones whilst waiting to be seen.
What actions were taken to address the priority?
Magazines have been withdrawn from the waiting room and a notice advising patients of the reason has been displayed.
Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):
Initial feedback from patients has been mixed although generally rather negative. It is anticipated that if this continues magazines will be returned to the waiting room. However, the problem of how to stop magazines getting tatty and how to stop patients using the surgery as a dumping ground for out of date magazines has yet to be resolved.
Priority area 3
Description of priority area:
Time waiting to speak to a receptionist at Front Desk
To try and reduce the time that patients have to wait to speak to a receptionist at front desk it was suggested that the practice look at the possibility of reseating a receptionist so that they are positioned at the front desk. It was noted that the tasks that a
receptionist at this station could do would be somewhat restricted due to patient confidentiality issues. However, it was agreed that this would be reviewed by the practice.
What actions were taken to address the priority?
This will take some time to address as in the first instance staff working schedules will be reviewed to see what work can effectively be done at front desk, without breaching patient confidentiality. Some IT configuration will be required to make this successful. It is expected that staff rotas may need to be amended to accommodate this change.
Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):
This change does not need to be publicised as it will be clear that there is an employee sat at front desk. Anticipated impact will be that patients coming to front desk will not have to wait as long to be seen. However, this may have a detrimental effect on those patients trying to contact the surgery by telephone. Until we have run this for a while we will not truly be able to assess it’s effectiveness.
Progress on previous years
If you have participated in this scheme for more than one year, outline progress made on issues raised in the previous year(s):
2011/2012
Action 1: To look into introducing an online booking system
Patients are in favour of introducing an online system to supplement the current ways of booking an appointment at the Charlton Hill Surgery. Patients are happy that they will be able to book pre-planned 10 minute doctor appointments with the Surgery online; it particularly suits patients who work.
The online booking system will be in addition to the existing ways of booking an appointment and is likely to reduce traffic on the phone, making booking an appointment a lot easier for all patients regardless of their booking method.
Target Timescale: June 2012 This action has been completed Action 2: Try to inform patients if their appointment is running late
Patients would like to see the introduction of an automated system to inform them about waiting times to help manage their expectations and prevent staff from having to manage this process.
Target Timescale: December 2012
Following review this action was postponed due to the high cost of implementing an automated system. Action 3: Look into making the Surgery more accessible for the disabled
To improve accessibility it has been decided by patients that a small section of the reception counter should be lowered. Also the practice should consider electric doors operated by a push button. It is appreciated that there may be budgetary constraints to be considered.
Target Timescales:
Changes to reception desk – November 2012 Electric doors – September 2012
Changes to reception desk has been completed.
Electric doors was deferred due to the high cost of implementing. However, we have recently decided to proceed and expect to have this work completed by June 2015.
2012/2013
Action 1 - Review of Appointment System
Internal review followed by detailed discussion with the Patient Participation Group. To include full review of current appointment system with focus on whether the Surgery has the right number of appointments at the times of days wanted by patients. Also, there is a need to focus on supply and demand issues to improve access. Review to include publication of how the appointments system works, what appointments are available and when, published on website and in practice leaflet.
Target Timescale: August 2013 This action has been completed.
Action 2 - Review of SMS Technology and how the Practice might make better use of technology available
A technological review of the SMS technology currently available to the Practice, including patient appointment reminders and disease review recalls. How what the Surgery currently has might be expanded to better meet patients’ needs. A further review of SMS technology that the Practice is not currently using and whether systems that exist can be integrated into the IT software used at the Practice. Particular focus on whether patients can receive a text to alert them that their results have been received and reviewed by the practice.
Target Timescales:
Review of technology currently used – June 2013
Review of additional technology – September 2013 This action has been completed. Action 3 - Review of Ability to Speak to GP or Nurse on the Phone
Internal review followed by detailed discussion with the Patient Participation Group. To include review of how patients request to speak to a clinician are managed and how those call backs to patients are made. Could call back times be more specifically managed? Review to include publication of how and when patients can access clinicians by telephone, published on website and in practice leaflet.
2013/2014
Action 1: Notification Board if clinician is running late
To investigate the possibility of installing a notification board to let patients know of delays to their appointment times.
It is hoped that this will give patients advance warning should their clinician be running late, so that patients are less likely to be sat in the waiting room feeling ‘forgotten’. Any notification system linked to the practice clinical system will depend upon technology interfacing between the appointments system and the notification system.
Target Timescale: December 2014
This action was deferred due to the high cost of implementing an automated system. As of December 2014 best quote is £2,700 + vat. This remains an open item and there is a desire to achieve this given other budgetary constraints.
Action 2: Better marketing of the online service
To proactively market the online service to drive up patient use both for booking appointments and for ordering repeat medication.
This will help increase the use of online services, which in turn will reduce telephone traffic and consequently improve access for patients and others wishing to contact the practice by telephone.
Target Timescale: September 2014 This action has been completed.
Action 3: To create more privacy when speaking to Receptionist
To make some building changes to facilitate private conversation with Reception.
This will allow for private discussion with receptionists through better configuration of the front desk and the installation of a privacy screen.
Target Timescale: September 2014
4. PPG Sign Off
Report signed off by PPG: YES Date of sign off: 16 January 2015
How has the practice engaged with the PPG:
How has the practice made efforts to engage with seldom heard groups in the practice population? The practice has invited patients from all demographics and especially tried to engage with patients from the rural areas.
Has the practice received patient and carer feedback from a variety of sources? Yes
Was the PPG involved in the agreement of priority areas and the resulting action plan? Yes
How has the service offered to patients and carers improved as a result of the implementation of the action plan? This action plan will take time to develop and so it is too early to say how the service has improved as a result of it.
Do you have any other comments about the PPG or practice in relation to this area of work? No, other than the practice and PPG work effectively together.
