Evaluation of the Eye Clinic Liaison Officer Service at James Cook University Hospital

Download (PDF 976KB)

Summary of report content

A combined report was created by Healthwatch Middlesbrough and Healthwatch Redcar and Cleveland (healthwatch South Tees) to evaluate the Eye Clinic Liaison Officer Service at James Cook University Hospital. The report was carried out as the service is currently under threat due to a lack of funding and at a possible risk of being reduced from its current four day a week provision. The aim of this work was to gather the views of service users and stakeholders to evaluate the benefits and the impact of the ECLO service. They also wanter to understand how the ECLO service at JCUH compares regionally and highlight how a reduction in funding will affect the access and support given to patients locally. The report involved a looking at reviews carried out previously by the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) and other Eye Health Needs Assessments (EHNA) and they carried out a survey of 30 people. It also includes statistics of the people that use the service. The review gives three recommendations: - That a recognised pathway be implemented so that all patients with a sight loss diagnosis are referred to an Eye Clinic Liaison Officer (ECLO). - Funding for the ECLO service at JCUH is continued in the long-term for the benefit of patients. - Dedicated space for the delivery of the ECLO service should be identified.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Evaluation of the Eye Clinic Liaison Officer Service at James Cook University Hospital
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Middlesbrough
Healthwatch Redcar & Cleveland
Date of publication 
Wednesday, 21 June, 2017
Type of report 
Service evaluation
Key themes 
Booking appointments
Building and facilities
Cost of services
Health and safety
Health promotion
Health protection
Holistic support
Information providing
Quality of appointment
Quality of care
Quality of treatment
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Other information of note about this report 
Good Practice
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? 

Details of health and care services included in the report

Secondary care services 

Details about conditions and diseases

Conditions or diseases 
Eye conditions
Types of long term conditions 
Blindness or severe visual impairment

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
Age group 
Not known
Not known
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Does the information include other people's views? 
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? 
Not known
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.