Enter and view: James Cook University Hospital – Ward 12

Download (PDF 521KB)

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Middlesbrough and Healthwatch Redcar and Cleveland (Healthwatch) gather information on people’s experiences of health and social care services and there are times when it is appropriate for Healthwatch to see and hear for themselves how services are being delivered: these visits are called ‘Enter and View’, they are not inspections. Healthwatch visited James Cook University Hospital – Ward 12 on 29 June 2015. The key findings highlighted areas in relation to patient feedback, staff feedback and observation. A total of 17 patients were spoken to. No major problems were highlighted and in general patients seemed very happy with the choice and quality of food. One patient commented that they could not fault the service on the ward. Four of the patients questioned had special dietary needs. They were all satisfied that their individual needs were being met although one commented that they usually had fresh water available but at the time of questioning the container was actually empty. One of the patients who required a pureed diet had on one occasion not received it as it had not been ordered. Healthwatch made 7 recommendations within the report in relation to environment, food/nutrition, training and communication.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Enter and view: James Cook University Hospital – Ward 12
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Middlesbrough
Healthwatch Redcar & Cleveland
Date of publication 
Thursday, 4 December, 2014
Date evidence capture began 
Thursday, 4 December, 2014
Date evidence capture finished 
Thursday, 4 December, 2014
Type of report 
Enter and view
Key themes 
Access
Communication between staff and patients
Food and nutrition
Health and safety
Staff training
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-6136

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 
Observation
Structured interview
Survey
How was the information collected? 
Visit to provider
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 
Announced

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

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
21
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? 
No
Does the information include staff's views? 
Yes
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
All care professionals
Does the information include other people's views? 
No
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? 
Yes
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
Yes action has been taken or promised
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Yes
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.