What’s it like being in a hospital waiting room? People’s views: Birmingham and Midland Eye Centre

Download (PDF 4.14MB)

Summary of report content

Healthwatch Birmingham undertook research about the quality of service in waiting rooms in Birmingham Hospitals following feedback from the public. This report presents the results for the Birmingham and Midland Eye Centre. The research was based on feedback directly from patients who were in hospital waiting rooms, an online questionnaire, in-depth interviews and focus groups with other third-sector organisations to collect the experiences of people who have a visual and/or hearing impairment. They spoke to 92 people about their experiences.

Most people that Healthwatch Birmingham spoke to as part of this study said that they were happy with the quality of care at the Birmingham and Midland Eye Centre. However, other aspects of their overall experience were less positive. Long waiting times, overcrowding, cleanliness and access for people with disabilities or specific problems that make it harder for them to participate in their own care are all areas that were highlighted by respondents as needing improvement.

The report contains 11 recommendations designed to address the issues uncovered by this research.  It also contains a response from the provider outlining the changes it intends to make as a result.

Would you like to look at:

General details

Report title 
What’s it like being in a hospital waiting room? People’s views: Birmingham and Midland Eye Centre
Local Healthwatch 
Healthwatch Birmingham
Date of publication 
Friday, 24 January, 2020
Date evidence capture began 
Friday, 25 January, 2019
Date evidence capture finished 
Friday, 8 February, 2019
Type of report 
Report
Key themes 
Access
Building and facilities
Communication between staff and patients
Decor
Service delivery organisation and staffing
Staff attitudes
Waiting time to be seen once arrived at appointment
Healthwatch reference number 
Rep-5148

Methodology and approach

Was the work undertaken at the request of another organisation? 
No
Primary research method used 
Focus group
Survey
User stories
How was the information collected? 
Research
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 
Appointments
Ophthalmology

Details about conditions and diseases

Conditions or diseases 
Eye conditions

Details of people who shared their views

Number of people who shared their views 
92
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? 
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? 
Yes action has been taken or promised
Is there evidence of impact in the report? 
Yes
Is there evidence of impact external to the report? 
Yes
What type of impact was determined? 
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.