This website uses cookies to function correctly.
You may delete cookies at any time but doing so may result in some parts of the site not working correctly.
 

Practice Survey Reporting

 

Standard Reporting Template

South Yorkshire & Bassetlaw Area Team

 

2014/15 Patient Participation Enhanced Service Reporting Template

Practice Name: Dr Patel & Partners

 

Practice Code:C87012

 

Signed on behalf of practice:                  Dr Patel & Partners                                     Date: 20 March 2015

Signed on behalf of PPG:                         Member                                             Date: 28 Jan 2015

 

  1. Prerequisite of Enhanced Service Develop/Maintain a Patient Participation Group (PPG)

 

Does the Practice have a PPG? YES / NO                            YES

 

Method of engagement with PPG: Face to face, Email, Other (please specify)                E-MAIL

 

Number of members of PPG:                 104

 

Detail the gender mix of practice population and PPG:                  Detail of age mix of practice population and PPG

 

%

Male

Female

 

%

<16

17-24

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

>75

Practice

49%

51%

 

Practice

20%

10%

12%

13%

15%

12%

10%

8%

PRG

39%

61%

 

PRG

0

2%

8%

12%

25%

23%

20%

9%

 

Detail the ethnic background of your practice population & PRG

 

 

White

Mixed/multiple ethnic groups

 

British

Irish

Gypsy or Irish traveller

Other White

White& black Caribbean

White & black African

White& Asian

Other mixed

Practice

83%

0%

0%

0.4%

0%

0%

0%

0%

PRG

94%

 

 

 

 

 

 

1%

 

 

 

Asian/Asian British

Black/AfricanCaribean/BlackBritish

Other

 

Indian

Pakistani

Bangladeshi

Chinese

Other Asian

African

Caribbean

Other Black

Arab

Any Other

Practice

1.5%

8.4%

0%

0%

0%

0.7%

0%

0%

0%

0.4%

PPG

1%

3%

 

1%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:

 

 

 

Describe steps taken to ensure that the PPG is representative of the practice population in terms of gender, age and ethnic

background and other members of the practice population:

 

Both the existence and the open nature of membership of the PPG is advertised in every second edition of our quarterly newsletter.

Additionally we have details on our web site.

We have run 3 one-day blitz’s on prescription collections with a simple slip paper slip giving details about joining the PPG group. We have targeted these using receptionists patient knowledge to ethnic groups.

An invite note is now enclosed in each “New Patient Welcome pack”.

There is a permanent poster in the waiting areas

 

Are there any specific characteristics of your practice population which means that other groups should be included in the PPG? NO

e.g. a large student population, significant number of jobseekers, large numbers of nursing homes, or a LGBT community?      

If you have answered yes, please outline measures taken to include those specific groups and whether those measures were

successful:

 

2. Review of patient feedback

Outline the sources of feedback that were reviewed during the year:    

 

The surgery has two patient suggestion boxes in the waiting areas.

The practice produces a newsletter at least four times per year and this includes a request to the reader to give any feedback and/or suggestions.

The practice has a website with a “contact” shortcut on the opening page directing the viewer to send the practice comments or suggestions.

The surgery has a Patient Reference Group (104 members) who are in regular two way contact.

The surgery has conducted one general survey to patients in the year asking for open feedback on any/all of our services (October 2014).

The surgery has conducted three rounds of FFT surveying.

The surgery records all written complaints and reviews these both on an ad-hoc basis throughout the year and a full reflective review at the end of the year.

The surgery has conducted three rounds of FFT surveying.

The surgery records all verbal complaints and reviews these both on an ad-hoc basis throughout the year and a full reflective review at the end of the year

The surgery has a high penetration of Case Managed patients. Initial plan creation, compiled by administration staff following a “script” with the patient includes questions on seeking feedback and comment

The surgery area of NHS Choices is actively promoted by all clinicians, reception and admin. The surgery has the highest rate of patient feedback in Rotherham.

 

How frequently were these reviewed with the PRG? .

 

Reviews of feedback were sought – and responded to on 11 occasions during the year

 

3. Action plan priority areas and implementation

 

Priority Area 1

Description of priority area:

Patients missing appointments – DNA’s has been tackled and scrutinised in the past but with many patients still commenting about the number of appointments missed by others

Variations in numbers of DNA’s has concerned the Patient Reference Group leading to a perception that there is scope to introduce further measures.

 

What actions were taken to address the priority?

Publicity

Text reminders. Have proved popular with patients (over 20% now registered for the service). We will now include an application form for text reminder with every new patient welcome pack.

Text reminder. Investigate if we can adapt the text reminder to give an advanced reminder (in addition to day before).

Our existing quarterly newsletter to include a section bringing further publicity to current the level of DNA’s and its impact.

Publicity on our website opening page.   Including trends and impact.

Revise the existing DNA advice letter.

Develop staff training in the use of recently introduced “integrated word” in SystmOne to bring more personalisation to the DNA letter.

Change the review system of “regular non-attenders”. Change from monthly review at clinical meeting to weekly review by 2 persons – doctor/administrator.

Regular non-attenders (defined as missed 3 out of 6 appointments) contacted by telephone. Recognised as time consuming and possibly unsettling. But will be used on a pilot basis to assess impact/workload.

 

Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):

Assessed on quarterly basis – trends examined.

Publicised in newsletter, practice leaflet, website, waiting room posters

Efforts made by the practice recognised by Patient Reference Group (through developing the plan).

Efforts by the practice recognised by the wider patient population through posters and newsletter.

 

 

Priority Area 2

Description of priority area:

Patient Recall letters – medication reviews – medical condition reviews. Making a smoother, clear and reduction in the need for patient appointments for medication reviews. At present 6500 reviews per year with some patient’s called for up to 4 reviews each per year.

 

 

What actions were taken to address the priority?

Full practice meeting to discuss and formulate an Action Plan. 37 staff and doctors present.

The practice meeting spent 3+ hours producing the plan.

Clear administrative process produced.

Month 1. Reviews due that month. Letters generated and sent with necessary blood test form. Patient asked to make appointment.

Month 2. Extraction of non responders. Reminder letters sent.

Month 3. Extraction of those still not responding. Outbound calls made from reception.

Month 4. Extraction of those still not responding reviewed by doctors on case by case basis.

 

Newly designed matrix by (produced by doctors) used by receptionist to book appropriate appointment and follow-up appointment (if needed). Includes timing and appointment length.

Doctor to set next review date, into clinical diary (usually 12 months) when review consultation takes place.

 

Redesign of all letters sent out to patients under new system. Explanation of the new system within letters.

 

 

Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):

Clearer system for patient.

Clearer information to help patient understand the process – including explanation of the process.

Appointment length to allow ample time for full discussion with doctor.

Matrix used by receptionist to ensure appropriate appointment is booked.

Matrix used by receptionist to ensure correct test samples are called for.

Publicised in newsletter, practice leaflet, waiting room poster. New system aware to all Patient Reference Group.

 

Priority Area 3

Description of priority area:

Friends and Family Test – how we collect, publicise, display results, timing of survey, reaching different patients

 

What actions were taken to address the priority?

Plan developed with Patient Reference Group to publicise FFT, how to run FFT, how to show outcomes from FFT, how to review actions from FFT.

Posters in waiting room, publicity on website, publicity in newsletter.

Clinical staff, doctors and nurses and reception staff actively encouraging patients to complete questionnaire.

Run on a “pop up” basis (one or two days per month).

Explore possibility of adapting arrival screens with prompts.

FFT form incorporated into a tear off in the newsletter.

Explore possibility of questionnaire embedded into website.

Receptionists inviting patients to complete questionnaire when attending.

Housebound patients opportunistically invited to complete FFT at doctor visits – hard to reach group.

Receptionists’ knowledge of carers to be used for inviting FFT completion – hard to reach group.

NHS standard simple card available in waiting areas with posting box

 

Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):

Quarterly results advice to Patient Reference Group

Results into practice newsletter

Results onto practice website – highlighting trends

Half yearly report to Patient Reference Group for comments/actions/feedback

Results publicised on waiting room poster

 

Priority Area 4

 

Description of priority area:

Getting through to the surgery on the telephone

 

 

What actions were taken to address the priority?

Problem assessed – With Findings in red.

Survey of “getting through” conducted.

Survey of patients and staff and their experiences – Some problems at Kimberworth Park Medical Centre. No particular patterns.

Identification of “peak time” through survey conducted – Evidence of mornings being more difficult.

Identification of length of “peak time” through survey conducted – Difficult to establish, on reflection unsure if this is useful information.

Assessment of staffing levels at peak times conducted – Recent increase in staffing levels at Kimberworth Park Medical Centre.

Feasibility of spreading pick up of lines through use of non-front line staff assessed – Judged to be impracticable, unable to establish lines of responsibility.

Additional lines at specific times only explored – Phone system manufacturer, unable to deliver.

Feasibility of spreading lines across two sites to spread staff availability – Problem of need to change working systems. Phone system manufacturer, unable to make this a “peak time” function.

Assessment of costs involved in permanent additional line. Assessment of equipment adaptation.

Assessment of existing staff able to handle an additional line.

 

 

Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):

Assessment of all suggestions from the Patient Participation Group and the surgery concluded that the most effective way to improve telephone access was an additional telephone line.

The cost of a line was approved by the practice and installed in late 2014. This is seen by the Practice as a valuable “investment” in improved services to patients. A good illustration of listening to & acting upon patient and patient Reference Group feedbck

 

 

Progress on previous years

If you have participated in this scheme for more than one year, outline progress made on issues raised in the previous year(s):

 

(i)               Patient Participation 3rd Year 2013-2014. Topic – Practice Communication

First drawn up/published March 2014. With updates in Red

INFLUENCE

 

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Raise awareness of practice leaflet

 

Poster

Waiting room poster advising patients to ask for a copy

 

May 2014 Leaflets & posters on permanent display 05/2014

Simply designed poster can be easily produced

See “Assessment” below

Patients unaware of practice website

 

 

Poster

 

 

 

 

Newsletter

Waiting room poster advising patients of address

 

Short article in newsletter reminding patients

May 2014

On display 05/2014

 

 

Spring/Summer newsletter 2014 Done & repeated on all subsequent

Simply designed poster can be easily produced

 

None

See “Assessment” below

Raising awareness of the complaints and feedback procedures

Poster

 

 

 

Newsletter

Waiting room poster advising patients of it and its functions

 

Short article in newsletter reminding patients

May 2014 Permanent poster on display 06/2014

 

Summer 2014 newsletter Article in Autumn 2014 newsletter

Simply designed poster can be easily produced

 

None

See “Assessment” below

ACTION - GENERAL

 

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Awareness of practice website

Advise in our correspondence

 

 

 

 

NHS Choices

 

 

 

 

 

Prescription message

 

 

Redesign our standard letter template to include website detail

 

 

Include a link in the national NHS Choices website to our own.

 

One month per half year, create special prescription message

May 2014

Now on footer 12/2014

 

 

 

 

April 2014

Done 04/2014 

 

 

 

June and December each year

Done June 14 & Jan 15

Full review of our letter templates will be needed. Needs some staff time and resources

 

Need to investigate method to follow.

 

Easily done, diarise action dates

To be a permanent change

 

 

 

 

 

To be a permanent change

 

 

Monitor patient feedback

Assistance with complaints

Leaflet

Create a leaflet available for handing out at reception

April 2014

Completed 04/14

Ensure this includes guidance on other organisations/ agencies who can help

To be a permanent change

ACTION - SPECIFIC

Patient calling system

 

Patients experiencing difficulty hearing their call

Critically appraise present systems, strengths and weaknesses. Practice to investigate products available

-         Visual

-         Audible

 

Practice to investigate feasibility of doctors working differently

Consider and contrast alternatives balancing costs Vs benefits

 

 

 

 

 

Consider ways other than technology for calling the patient

A working group to research and report back within first quarter (Apr-Jun 2014)

 

 

 

A working group to research and report back within first quarter (Apr-Jun 2014)

Some work late summer 2014. 

Inconclusive

Scheduled for Mar 15 

Perception that many of these products are expensive

 

 

 

 

 

 

Might impact on patient consultation time. May be more difficult and time consuming, reducing the patient time

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See “Assessment” below

Appointments structure

Although not part of the “communication survey”, some patient comments indicate concern over availability mix

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expanding methods of appointment booking

Data collection exercise, assessment, review and implementation to be drawn up

 

 

 

 

 

 

Move ahead with some on line appointment booking

Data collection to begin April 14, assessment May, implement June 14 onwards

Changes to "mix of appts" made Oct 14

 

July 2014

Begun Mar 2015

Considerable. Data collection will involve paper and computer collection. Assessment by team drawn from across the practice

 

 

Ability to do this rests with clinical software suppliers.

Review comments and feedback from patients, reception, doctors 2 months after implementation Likely -revisions and a follow-up plan.

 

This significant change will mean only limited number of appointments to be available initially

See “Assessment “ below

 

Patients unaware of practice leaflet

Ensure a leaflet provided to all newly registered patients

Issued by receptionist with registration form

From April 2014

Standard procedure from May 14

None

None needed

Raising awareness of website

Leaflet

Complaints procedure

By publicity paper

Create a short paper drawing patients attention to these. To include in our regular patient recall letters

Recall letter system under review and revision.      Carried forward to 05/15.  Large amount of work needed to build into a new system.

Opportune time to introduce this with manageable impact

Expect to receive patient feedback

 

See “Assessment” below

ASSESSMENT

Practice leaflet, website, complaints procedure

Benchmark patient awareness

Assess impact of our actions

Short survey of patients

 

6 months after implementation (Sept 14)

Completed Oct 14 & Jan 15.  Some evidence of raised awareness

Patient calling system

Benchmark patient satisfaction

Assess impact of our actions

Short survey of patients

 

6 months after a solution has been implemented

Dec 14 No equipment purchased yet.  Funding Issue Cost to be re-assessed in Summer 15

Appointments Structure

Benchmark patient satisfaction

Assess impact of our actions

Short survey of patients

 

3 months after a solution has been implemented and should be repeated 3 months later

Survey Dec 14  - inconclusive.  To survey again post Easter 15

 

 

 

(ii)             Patient Participation 2nd Year 2012-2013.   Topic, Prescriptions

ACTION PLAN

 

First drawn up/published March 2013. With updates in Red

INFLUENCE

 

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Publicise

 

Ordering methods available

On-line- website

Post

Fax

Prescription box in waiting room

 

Service available from local Pharmacists

 

Request Doctor for Medication synchronisation

 

Patients taking responsibility for stocks build ups

Newsletter. Publicise ways of ordering repeat prescriptions

A regular feature/article to be inserted in our practice newsletter

Next published newsletter (Spring 2013)

Inserted Summer 2013 & Spring 2014

Can be easily included within the newsletter articles

None needed but 6 monthly re-insert.

Reflective discussion at clinical meeting December 2013 judged this a success

Website Publicise ways of ordering repeat prescriptions

Include as a regular item. Additionally use the “news splash”

Start in April 2013 with “news splash” at 1 week every other month

Website "newsflash" May 2013 & July 2013 & Sep 2013

Little, practice staff to publish and necessary proof reading

 

 

 

Will be reviewed for impact at each insert

Has proved difficult to assess.  Simple to do & good for times of no news.

Judged successful.  Clinical meeting December 2013.

Waiting room poster s publicising

-Ordering methods

-Using pharmacist to help

-Talk to Dr about medication timings

-Check on Home stocks

 

 

Clearly worded poster advising /publicising

March/April after creating poster

 

Poster created Summer 2013

Simply designed poster can easily be produced

Alternate monthly

Successful            

Works by being "fresh" on each display

 

 

 

ACTION - GENERAL

 

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Stockpiling

Share our findings with Local Chemists

Provide report to our local Pharmacist

April 2013

 

Done Apr 13

Easily done. Provides additional opportunity to strengthen links

 

Not applicable

Ordering Methods

Provide additional publicity for prescription order & delivery services

Liaise with local pharmacists & discuss feasibility of short publicity drives

When we have reached general agreement

 

Attaching a flyer to prescriptions collected from reception.

 

Turnaround Time

Remain sensitive to patients emergency situations

Continue to treat unexpected running out of medication sympathetically

Ongoing

Receptionists will always take full details and liaise with doctors when emergency replenishment is requested

Assessed by clinical meeting December 2013.  No negative patient feedback.  Any practice change would be problematical.

Reviewed again at clinical meeting Dec 2014.  Judged Minimal benefits.

 

 

ACTION - SPECIFIC

 

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Synchronisation

Doctors to adjust multi medication synchronisation

Doctors will opportunistically discuss with patient on all occasions within time constraints

From April 2013

Has been on-going.

May place extra strain on consultation within time slot

See assessment

New medication review system implemented Jan 2014.

Re-assess June 14

Synchronisation

At Medication reviews. Doctors to adjust multi medication synchronisation

Doctors will always consider & discuss with patient. Adjust appropriately

March 2013

Non extra

New TELEPHONE medication review system implemented Feb 2014. 

Re-assess June 14 

Reviewed at clinical meeting Dec 2014.  Now judged too time consuming.

Ordering Methods

Target patients collecting repeat prescriptions. Raise awareness particularly on-line website ordering

Note attached to all repeat prescriptions for collection at surgery

At quarterly intervals – for 2 weeks

Has been run for 2 two week periods.  May 13 & Jan 14

 

Further "drive" Nov 2014.

Will take additional admin and reception resources which can be absorbed for 2 weeks at a time

See assessment

Tangible increase in patients registering after each "drive"

 

 

 

 

Again - good take up.

Electronic Prescription service

Practice will elect to be involved at an early stage when this new service begins locally

No paper prescription. Patient elects Pharmacy, Prescription electronically transmitted to Chemist for collection

Is in pilot phase at one local Practice. Projected to be available Autumn 2013

Project (nationally driven) has been put back to Spring 2014.

Implemented Summer 2015

 

Reduced visit benefit to patients but new system - needs assessment

 

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT

Synchronisation

Benchmark level of patient satisfaction

Assess the success of our actions

Conduct short patient survey

 

Survey 6 months apart

First survey performed Feb 2014

Second survey performed Jan 2015.

Ordering Methods

Benchmark level of patient satisfaction

Assess the success of our actions

Conduct short patient survey

 

Survey 6 months apart

First survey performed Feb 2014

Second survey performed Jan 2015.

Unused Medication Stocks

Benchmark level of patient satisfaction

Assess the success of our actions

Conduct short patient survey

 

Survey 6 months apart

First survey performed Feb 2014

Second survey performed Jan 2015

Electronic Prescription service

Benchmark level of patient satisfaction

 

 

 

Survey 6 months after implementation

(Jan 2013)  Not yet started. Local support systems not fully ready

Implemented Summer 2014.  Survey set for May 2015.

 

 

 

Assessment Survey of Awareness – to see if action plan has had an impact.

February 2014

Percentage responses

Do you use the practice Repeat Prescription ordering system

Yes -100%

NO - Nil

 

 

If you have more than one item of repeat medication, do you find your supplies of drugs run out at the same time

YES – 25%

NO – 38%

 

 

If they do not run out at the same time, is this a problem to you

YES- 13%

NO – 50%

 

Not applicable -13%

Have you ever found some of your drugs or items begin to stockpile at your home

YES - Nil

No – 100%

 

 

Did you know that you can get your repeat prescriptions by

POST -25%

WEB SITE – 63%

BOX in Surgery – 75%

FAX - NIL

 

 

Assessment Survey of Awareness – to see if action plan has had an impact.

January 2015

Percentage responses

Do you use the practice Repeat Prescription ordering system

Yes - 94%

NO – 6%

 

 

If you have more than one item of repeat medication, do you find your supplies of drugs run out at the same time

YES – 37%

NO – 44%

 

 

If they do not run out at the same time, is this a problem to you

YES- 14%

NO – 55%

 

Not applicable -22%

Have you ever found some of your drugs or items begin to stockpile at your home

YES - *5

No – 92%

 

 

Did you know that you can get your repeat prescriptions by

POST -22%

WEB SITE – 71%

BOX in Surgery – 80%

FAX - NIL

 

(iii)           Patient Participation 2011-2012. 1st Year   Topic, Patients who do not attend (DNA’s

Action Plan. First drawn up/published March 2012. With updates in Red

  

INFLUENCE

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Newsletter

A regular feature/article to be inserted in our practice newsletter

Next published newsletter (Spring 2012)

Done, Summer 2012

Winter 2013

Can be easily included within the newsletter articles

None needed but annually by way of good practice

Success.  Newsletter is well received by patients (evidenced in other survey).  Continued re-inserts keeps influencing.

Website

Publish DNA policy on our website including a home page link

When the policy has been finalised. It can be published immediately

Published July 2012

Small amount of work required by practice staff to publish and necessary proof reading

This will be a permanent item on the website but annually by way of good practice

Success.  Correct place for this information.

Waiting room poster advising policy

Clearly worded poster advising all patients of our policy towards patients who miss appointments

March/April after creating poster

In Place from May 2012

Simply designed poster can easily be produced

Annually Reviewed May 2013

Success.  Correct place for this information.

Waiting room poster advising wasted appointments

Poster with numbers of wasted appointments from previous week/month

March/April 2012 after creating poster

In Place June 2012

Suitable display material needs sourcing (able to display changing numbers)

Initial intention is that this will be a permanent item. Review its visual impact at 6 monthly intervals. Consider alternative methods of displaying the wasted time.

Reviewed Dec 2012.

Success.  High impact.  Patient talking point.

 

 

 

ACTION - GENERAL

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Practice protocol for DNA’s

Develop a policy setting out surgery expectations and reflecting views of our patient survey

Policy to be created in March 2012.

Created April 2012

Will require senior admin time for creation and fine tuning. Consideration and approval by Partners. Consideration and approval by patient participation group

To be reviewed annually or in light of any surgery changes which may happen

Reviewed.  March 2012 & Dec 2013

Raise awareness of Practice Protocol

Issue to all newly registered patients, a guide to the Protocol

Issue to all new patients as part of new registration procedure. March 2012

Procedure in place May 2012

Easily implemented and issued at time of registration

Reviewed annually

Reviewed April 2013.  Suitable & robust

Publicity in practice booklet

Booklet contains information about missed appointments. This should have more prominence and be more specific. Re-wording of the text and consideration towards re-siting.

Can be incorporated into next print run of the booklet which will probably be Autumn 2012.

Will require senior admin time for creation and fine tuning. Will need resources of the publisher and printer to consider design and form. Requires consideration and approval by partnership.

Reviewed at each print run of the booklet in common with all other articles.

Has not yet been possible - technical difficulties.  Re-review May 2014.

Appointment text reminders

Not possible with present clinical system

Our understanding is that modern clinical systems may have this facility available. When the surgery has a suitable system, we will take positive steps to assess usability and our own resource implications

 

System started oct 2013

Stand alone text reminder systems are available. Rejected in view of prohibitive costs.

Inclusive text reminder software with modern clinical system will require surgery staff resources. Gaining mobile telephone numbers, structuring the reminder schedules, initiating the daily reminders, reviewing suitability.

There is much we will need to learn about this topic and this can only be when we have a modern clinical system. Review seems likely to be an ongoing exercise.

 

Reviewed Jan 2014.  Success 2111 patients have registered

Reinforce

Issue appointment cards/offer appointment card by receptionist

March 2012

 

Began April 2012

 

Receptionist can issue a simple appointment note to over the counter appointment requests. Some resources needed to produce a printed appointment slip

Ongoing although seems likely to continue as part of good service to patients.

Reviewed Apr 2013.  Success.  Popular with patients

 

Reinforce

Verbal reinforcement. Receptionist to ask patients “can you repeat that back to me please”.

April 2012

Trialled Summer 2012

New procedure/idea needs rolling out to a collective meeting

This could be potentially contentious. Some patients may feel this is patronising.

Weekly review with reception supervisors to assess patient reaction.

(It will be difficult to identify the impact of any single action, however since this action will use specific and ongoing staff time it should be assessed).

Unsuccessful.  Patients not comfortable with tR

 

 

 

 

ACTION – SPECIFIC

Action

Method of Implementation

When to implement

Resource Implications

Method of review

Protocol for surgery response to non-attenders

A partner approved protocol to be developed setting out the practice response to patients who habitually do not attend

Immediately

Protocol to be developed and approved by the Partners of the practice

Annually

Reviewed at clinical meeting

Reviewed March 2012 & Dec 2013

Notice to non-attenders

Generate and send a standard letter to non-attender and record such action

Immediately

Started September 2012 - technical difficulties

Postal advice will require reception staff time, reviewing surgery lists daily, generating, preparing and posting letter

Telephone contact would require considerably more staff time which could not be accommodated within present resources

Ongoing but with review at one year. (It will be difficult to identify the impact of any single action, however since this action will use specific and ongoing staff time it should be assessed).

Reviewed Sep 2013.  Impact not measurable.  We will continue as its a tangible action

Notice to repeat non-attenders

Generate and send a second standard letter to non-attend+ers and record such action. Giving notice that repeat non-attendance within 12 months brings consideration to continued registration.

Immediately

Started September 2012 - technical difficulties

As above this requires reception staff time, reviewing the surgery lists daily, cross referencing with existing data, generating, preparing and posting letter

Review at one year

Reviewed Sep 2013.  Has produced change in DNA patient behaviour.  Success.

 

 

 

ASSESSMENT

Review/reflect mechanism

Regular count of DNA’s and total appointments offered. Weekly (initially) count of both numbers to produce a % comparator.

Also required is some historical data before the implementation for comparison.

Immediately

A robust system with responsible staff (& back up) to collect the data & publicise where agreed.

This will be readily achievable after some cross staff consolation.

Data to be compared monthly & reported into Patient participation Group.

Reviewed at Clinical meeting Dec 2013 with protocol review.  Decided surgery room poster provided necessary publicy. 

 

 

4. PPG Sign Off

 

Report signed off by PPG:           YES

Date of sign off:   28 Jan 2015

 

 

How has the practice engaged with the PPG:

By regular e-mail contact through the whole of the year.

 

How has the practice made efforts to engage with seldom heard groups in the practice population?

The practice has almost 250 e-mail subscribers to the newsletter, the practice has 104 members of its PPG. The practice has evidence that a number of patients use their company e-mail, indicating a good take up of “working persons”. The practice delivers the newsletter to patients on Case Management when the case creation home visit is made. The practice has specifically targeted ethnic minority groups when they have collected prescriptions. The practice has an invite to the PPG and a General Feedback form in all “new patient welcome packs”. The practice has completed a number of blitzes to recruit carers (who are frequent visitors to the practice and known to reception staff) for sign up to the PPG and for completion of our general feedback form.

 

Has the practice received patient and carer feedback from a variety of sources? Yes

 

Was the PPG involved in the agreement of priority areas and the resulting action plan? Yes

 

How has the service offered to patients and carers improved as a result of the implementation of the action plan?

Improvements are clearly demonstrated in the Action Plan for this year’s Patient Participation, 2011-12 Patient Participation, 2012-13 Patient Participation, 2013-14 Patient Participation as shown in the foregoing in this document.

 

Do you have any other comments about the PPG or practice in relation to this area of work?

The practice PPG has been a successful project over the 4 years of its existence, we have been fortunate in gaining the input of over 100 interested patients and patient views in the 1000’s. We have successfully encouraged strong and balanced feedback through the PPG and the use of NHS Choices (of which this practice has the highest uptake in Rotherham). Our uptake of subscribers to the quarterly newsletter is further evidence of an actively curious population contributing to the smooth running of this surgery.

 



 
Call 111 when you need medical help fast but it’s not a 999 emergencyNHS ChoicesThis site is brought to you by My Surgery Website