Patient participation and changes to primary care

Download (PDF 178KB)

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Warwickshire undertook research into patient participation and changes to primary care. Following their Standing Conference in May (which aimed to galvanise patient voice by bringing patient representatives together) Healthwatch Warwickshire set out to discover more about whether individuals were aware of their Patient Participations Groups (PPGs), how Primary Care Networks (PCNs) were being introduced, and how any changes should be communicated.

From July-September Healthwatch Warwickshire held multiple sessions across two outpatient departments (Rugby St. Cross and George Eliot Hospital), talking to the public about changes to GP services (PCNs) and how they receive communications from primary care. They promoted this survey to other groups and online, in total hearing from 905 people.

Healthwatch Warwickshire found that most people (90%) are not members of their PPG. It also found that people thought e-mail (41%) and letters (33%) are the best way of GPs telling them about changes that are happening. Moreover, most people would not mind going to another practice for care (61%) as long as it was not too far away.

Healthwatch Warwickshire will promote these findings with various organisations, including those who pay for delivery of services and those who hold the system to account, in order to ensure services are meeting people’s needs by listening, and reacting, to them.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Patient participation and changes to primary care
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Warwickshire
Date of publication 
Friday, 18 December, 2020
Date evidence capture began 
Wednesday, 1 July, 2020
Date evidence capture finished 
Wednesday, 30 September, 2020
Type of report 
Patient experience
Key themes 
Access
Communication between staff and patients
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-7999

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 
Engagement event
How was the information collected? 
Engagement Event
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

Primary care services 
GP practice

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
905
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? 
No
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? 
No
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
No
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
No

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.