1000 Voices - Intel summary report, Bucks

Download (PDF 721KB)

Summary of report content

In June 2017 Healthwatch Buckinghamshire produced a report highlighting some of the themes and trends received by Healthwatch. The report stated that the feedback had come from just under 1500 pieces of public feedback gathered up until December 2016. Some of the highlights include: • People most commonly share comments about Primary Care services. This includes dentists and GPs, and that the majority of comments were positive. • 21% of all feedback was about appointments, the majority of this feedback was negative. • Quality of Treatment was the second most popular area of feedback, the report states that almost as many comments praising quality of treatment were received as negative comments. • Over 150 comments fell into the General Compliment theme. The report makes reference to the continuing publication of patient feedback themes and trends. The report contained no feedback from providers or commissioners, however the report does state that many of the individual comments are anonymised and shared with service providers, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and the Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs). In some cases patient concerns are shared. This has prompted CQC to visit a GP branch practice and the Clinical Commissioning Group to review appointments following feedback.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
1000 Voices - Intel summary report, Bucks
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Buckinghamshire
Date of publication 
Monday, 12 December, 2016
Date evidence capture began 
Monday, 12 December, 2016
Date evidence capture finished 
Monday, 12 December, 2016
Type of report 
Report
Patient experience
Key themes 
Access
Booking appointments
Engagement
Quality of care
Quality of treatment
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-6511

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
No
What type of organisation requested the work 
N/A
Primary research method used 
Engagement event
How was the information collected? 
Engagement Event
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 
N/A

Details of health and care services included in the report

Primary care services 
GP practice
Secondary care services 
Appointments
Inpatient care
Outpatients

Details about conditions and diseases

Types of long term conditions 
Not known

Details of people who shared their views

Age group 
Not known
Gender 
Not known
Ethnicity 
Not known
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Yes
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
Not known
Does the information include staff's views? 
Not known
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
N/A
Does the information include other people's views? 
Yes
What was the main sentiment of the people who shared their views? 
Mixed

Outcomes and impact

Were recommendations made by local Healthwatch in the report? 
Not applicable
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
No
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
No
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
No
What type of impact was determined? 
Implied Impact

Network Impact
Relationships that exist locally, regionally, nationally have benefited from the work undertaken in the report
 
Implied Impact
Where it is implied that change may occur in the future as a result of Healthwatch work. This can be implied in a provider  response, press release or other source. Implied impact can become tangible impact once change has occurred.
 
Tangible Impact
There is evidence of change that can be directly attributed to Healthwatch work undertaken in the report.