Summary Report Care in corridor at Worcestershire Royal Hospital

Download (PDF 323KB)
You voted 'Yes'.

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Worcestershire visited Worcestershire Royal Hospital and spoke to patients using accident and emergency and medical assessment units in February to March 2017. They spoke to 119 people being cared for in corridors and created a report. This is a summary of the findings of that report, including: - Half of the people that we spoke with had been in the corridor for more than 4 hours. - most patients had not been given any information about being in the corridor. Many did not know the name of the person looking after them. - Most people had not been told how long they might be waiting in the corridor. Some patients did not know why they were waiting. - People told them that it was difficult to sleep and rest in the corridor areas because of noise and bright lighting. They have asked the hospital to tell people what their plans are to make sure that national standards for A&E are met and when this will happen. They have also asked them to tell people what they will do about all of the improvements set out, and if they are not going to do anything why this is the case.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
Summary Report Care in corridor at Worcestershire Royal Hospital
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Worcestershire
Date of publication 
Wednesday, 28 June, 2017
Date evidence capture began 
Monday, 13 February, 2017
Date evidence capture finished 
Tuesday, 21 March, 2017
Type of report 
Report
Key themes 
Administration
Building and facilities
Communication between staff and patients
Food and nutrition
Health and safety
Information providing
Patient records
Quality of care
Quality of staffing
Quality of treatment
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Staff attitudes
Staff levels
Waiting time to be seen once arrived at appointment
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-1382

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
Not known
Primary research method used 
Observation
User stories
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

Secondary care services 
Acute services with overnight beds
Urgent and emergency care services 
Accident & emergency

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 
119
Age group 
Not known
Gender 
All
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.