GP patient experience review 2015-17

Download (PDF 2.08MB)
You voted 'Yes'.

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Warwickshire carried out a programme of Enter and View visits on all 82 GP surgeries in the county between February 2015 and March 2017. The aim of the programme was to assess the patient experience from beginning to end, and an individual report was produced after each visit. This report summarises the findings and impact of all 82 visits. The report identifies the common areas for improvement including: - maximising the use of the online appointment booking system - communicating appointment delays to patients on the day - promotion of the Patient Participation Groups (PPGs) - providing comments/complaints boxes. The report also highlights areas of good practice including: - participation in the over 75s project by Arden Medical Centre - the appointment booking system at The Arrow Surgery - the triage system implemented by the Riversley Road Surgery. Healthwatch Warwickshire followed up on the impact of their recommendations by revisiting 42 GP surgeries. They found that 25 surgeries had implemented all recommendations. Of the 208 recommendations made in total, 53% had been implemented. They also noted that the programme of visits had resulted in stronger relationships with GP surgeries and PPGs across Warwickshire.

Would you like to look at:

Report 
PDF icon GP-Patient-Experience-Review-2015-to-2017.pdf

General details

Report title 
GP patient experience review 2015-17
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Warwickshire
Date of publication 
Monday, 13 November, 2017
Date evidence capture began 
Sunday, 1 February, 2015
Date evidence capture finished 
Friday, 31 March, 2017
Type of report 
Patient experience
Key themes 
Booking appointments
Communication between staff and patients
Public involvement
Waiting time to be seen once arrived at appointment
Other information of note about this report 
Good Practice
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-1818

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
Survey
How was the information collected? 
Visit to provider
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 
Not Known

Details of health and care services included in the report

Primary care services 
GP practice

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
2000
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? 
Yes
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
Receptionists
Service manager
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? 
Not applicable
Does the information contain a response from a provider? 
Not applicable
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Yes
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
Not applicable
What type of impact was determined? 
Implied Impact
Tangible impact (not cost related)

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.