Hospital Discharge in North Kent, Kent

Download (PDF 876KB)

Summary of report content

To understand the issues that affect hospital discharge in North Kent. Through this identify the issues that may prevent people from having a good discharge and to uncover best practice and innovative solutions. 125 people were spoken to including patients, carers and families, Practice Managers, Darent Valley Hospital staff and Care Home Managers. HW Kent also took part in a Rapid Improvement Workshop. Positives seen include: the Discharge Lounge is a positive and welcoming space and the staff have time to talk to patients. Staff were proactively seeking and collecting medication for patients. 88% of patients said they felt well enough to go home when they were discharged. Challenges seen include: People are often unclear about what they should do after being discharged. 36% of patients who needed extra care or support weren’t told what that would be. Challenges for the hospital include: Huge demand on services. Patients are often medically well for discharge but there is no-where for them to go. Lack of community based rehabilitation services to support people at home can mean people spend longer in hospital. Challenges for other people include: Discharge paperwork is not always completed on time. Handwritten discharge papers can lead to errors. Recommendations include: Continue to invest and support the Discharge Lounge and make maximum use of it and to support the Frailty Navigators. Discharge paperwork must be completed at the bedside, a copy given to the patient/carer and sent electronically to the GP and any other relevant professional.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Hospital Discharge in North Kent, Kent
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Kent
Date of publication 
Sunday, 1 January, 2017
Date evidence capture began 
Wednesday, 11 November, 2015
Date evidence capture finished 
Monday, 12 December, 2016
Type of report 
Patient experience
Key themes 
Discharge
Medication
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-6392

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
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
Secondary care services 
Diabetic medicine
Social care services 
Adult social care
After care
Residential care home

Details about conditions and diseases

What type of pregnancy or maternity themes are included in the report 
N/A

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
125
Age group 
Not known
Gender 
Not known
Ethnicity 
Not known
Sexual orientation 
Not known
Does the information include public's views? 
Not known
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 
All care professionals
Does the information include other people's views? 
Yes
What was the main sentiment of the people who shared their views? 
Neutral

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? 
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.