Care in the Corridor at the Worcestershire Royal Hospital Survey Report

Download (PDF 1.18MB)

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Worcestershire visited Worcestershire Royal Hospital and spoke to patients using accident and emergency and medical assessment units in February to March 2017. They spoke to 119 people being cared for in corridors and created a report. The main findings were: - Half of the people that they spoke with had been in the corridor for more than 4 hours. - most patients had not been given any information about being in the corridor. Many did not know the name of the person looking after them. - Most people had not been told how long they might be waiting in the corridor. Some patients did not know why they were waiting. - People told them that it was difficult to sleep and rest in the corridor areas because of noise and bright lighting. They have asked the hospital to tell people what their plans are to make sure that national standards for A&E are met and when this will happen. They have also asked them to tell people what they will do about all of the improvements set out, and if they are not going to do anything why this is the case. There were 38 recommendations in all.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Care in the Corridor at the Worcestershire Royal Hospital Survey Report
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Worcestershire
Date of publication 
Wednesday, 28 June, 2017
Date evidence capture began 
Monday, 13 February, 2017
Date evidence capture finished 
Sunday, 26 March, 2017
Type of report 
Enter and view
Key themes 
Building and facilities
Communication between staff and patients
Food and nutrition
Health and safety
Information providing
Quality of appointment
Quality of care
Quality of staffing
Quality of treatment
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Staff attitudes
Staff levels
Waiting time to be seen once arrived at appointment
Healthwatch reference number 

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
Not known
Primary research method used 
How was the information collected? 
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 

Details of health and care services included in the report

Secondary care services 
Acute services with overnight beds
Acute services without overnight beds / listed acute services with or without overnight beds
Accident & emergency
Urgent and emergency care services 
Accident & emergency
Urgent care services

Details about conditions and diseases

Conditions or diseases 
Injuries, accidents and wounds
Types of disabilities 
Not known
Types of long term conditions 
Not known

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
Age group 
Specific ethnicity if known 
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Does the information include carer's, friend's or relative's views? 
Does the information include staff's views? 
Does the information include other people's views? 
Not known
What was the main sentiment of the people who shared their views? 

Outcomes and impact

Were recommendations made by local Healthwatch in the report? 
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
Not known

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.