Hospital Outpatient Report, Leeds

Download (PDF 2.28MB)

Summary of report content

The focus for the outpatient project was to look at the quality of information and communication patients receive before and during their appointment, waiting time concerns and physical access including parking. During November 2016, 4 visits to outpatient 7 & 8 at St James Hospital took place. Views and experiences were gathered using a questionnaire in two parts, from patients, carers and/or relatives in the waiting areas. Recommendations; Patients should be informed in their appointment letter where to go to at the reception area of Chancellor Wing, all appointment letters should include details and location of the self-check in machines, the trust should work with the provider of the text reminder service to find a way to indicate which clinic or service each text reminder relates to. RBS team to look at ways to improve communication with clinic reception staff with regards to text cancellation, the trust should work with the provider of the self-check in machine to resolve the issue of directing people to the wrong clinic area. Environment; review internal signage with a view to making it easier for patients to navigate. Change waiting areas from numerical to alphabetical, review the number of blue badge spaces as it appears to be inadequate.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Hospital Outpatient Report, Leeds
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Leeds
Date of publication 
Tuesday, 1 November, 2016
Date evidence capture began 
Tuesday, 1 November, 2016
Date evidence capture finished 
Tuesday, 1 November, 2016
Type of report 
Report
Patient experience
Key themes 
Administration
Booking appointments
Cancellation
Car parking access
Car parking charges
Quality of appointment
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Staff attitudes
Waiting time to be seen once arrived at appointment
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-6358

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
No
Primary research method used 
Survey
User stories
How was the information collected? 
Visit to provider
If an Enter and View methodology was applied, was the visit announced or unannounced? 
N/A

Details of health and care services included in the report

Secondary care services 
Cardiology
Outpatients

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
42
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? 
Yes
Does the information include staff's views? 
No
Types of health and care professionals engaged 
N/A
Does the information include other people's views? 
Yes
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? 
No
Is there evidence of impact in 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.