Community Gynaecology User Satisfaction Survey June 2012

Community Gynaecology User Satisfaction Survey June 2012

Why do the user surveys? Commissioning for Quality and Innovation (CQUIN) targets (DH, 2008) Feedback is submitted The Hull and East Riding Sexual and Reproductive Healthcare Partnership value statement places the needs of its users as their focus The City Health Care Partnership CIC vision provide patient-centred, high quality services Standard 9 of the BASHH guidance (BASHH, 2010) to gather and act upon user feedback Department of Health (2010) Liberating the NHS (Department of Health, 2010) places patients and the public at the heart of what it does

Community Gynaecology Service The service: Is aimed at all women across Hull and the East Riding of Yorkshire. Women can refer themselves into the service or they can be referred by other health professionals. It offers: Advice Treatment and support on gynaecological problems/issues Contraceptive advice Arrangement for female sterilisation Termination of pregnancy advice and arrangements

The Survey Aims The user survey aims to establish the views of our Community Gynaecology (CG) service from the users’ perspective. An action plan can then be created to develop the service, taking into account the views of our users. Objectives The objectives of the survey were to ascertain timely user feedback regarding: Basic demographic information Reason for attendance Waiting times Experiences when attending the Partnerships’ CG clinics Experience of the care received Areas of satisfaction/dissatisfaction Methodology Data collection was undertaken by use of a questionnaire that was given to service users attending the CG clinic at Conifer within Wilberforce Health Centre between 23 rd April 2012 and 1 st June Service users were asked to complete and post their questionnaires in a collection box.

Response Rate Response rate: Total responses received:69 Total attendances: 221 Percentage responded: 31%

Responses

Age, Gender and Ethnicity Key findings: Gender: All those that responded, 97% (n= 67) were female. 3% (n= 2) did not answer the question. Age: The highest response rate was received from those aged between 20 – 29 years old (33%, n= 23). The second highest response rate was received from those aged 40+ (28%, n= 19). Interestingly, last years results are almost identical with regard to age; being years (36%), years (25%) and 40+ years (28%). Ethnicity: 78% (n= 54) of respondents stated that they were white British, 9% (n= 6) stated they were white; any other white background and 6% (n= 4) stated they were Asian or Asian British; any other Asian background.

Is this your first visit to a Community Gynaecology clinic? Key findings: 59% (n= 41) of respondents stated this was not their first visit to a gynaecology clinic. 39% (n= 27) stated this was their first visit to a gynaecology clinic. This is new business in the last year. In % of users stated they had not previously attended the clinic. Type of visit/ Day of attendance Key findings: 100% (n= 69) of respondents indicated they attended for an appointment. Wednesday appeared the most popular day with 55% (n= 38) surveys being completed.

Have you chosen to use a CG clinic rather than a GP surgery or pharmacy? Key findings: 67% (n= 46) of respondents indicated they had chosen a CG clinic instead of a GP surgery or pharmacy. Of that 67%, the main reasons indicated were: Specialist staff (27%) Good atmosphere (15%) Was referred (15%) Confidential (14%) Convenient place (11%) ‘Other’ accounted for 9% of responses. Reasons included: Tried GP before Wanted a second opinion Own GP not understanding Wanted to see someone other than GP

How did you find out about the CG clinic? Key findings: The majority of respondents (67%, n= 46) found out about the CG clinic through their GP surgery or through friends and family. 6% (n= 4) found out about the CG clinic via the website. 1% (n= 1) found out about the CG clinic via the phonebook. 22% (n= 15) found out about the CG clinic through ‘other’ means. Other means: HRI pain clinic Consultant secretary Work Community nurse Conifer House suggestion Social worker Family planning clinic Referred by GP Came in for sexual health check ‘Other’ means…

Did anyone tell you to come here specifically? Key findings: 35% (n= 24) were not told to come to the CG clinic specifically. 29% (n= 20) were told to come to the CG clinic by their GP surgery. 23% (n= 16) were told to come to the clinic by friends or family. A further 13% (n= 9) stated other people/places had told them to come here specifically. Other means: HRI pain clinic Consultant secretary Community nurse Referred Family Planning clinic Interpretor ‘Other’ means…

What are the reasons for your visit today? Key findings: 38% (n= 31) of responses indicated they attended clinic to get a coil inserted or removed. 19% (n= 15) of responses indicated they attended the clinic for period problems. A further 11% (n= 9) of responses indicated they attended regarding premenstrual syndrome. 7% (n= 6) indicated contraception issues/problems. 7% (n= 6) indicated pain as the reason for their visit. 14% (n= 11) of responses gave other reasons for their attendance. ‘Other’ reasons include: Discuss sterilisation Problems after child birth Fertility To discuss IVF Scan results Wasn’t happy with GP Bleeding during sex Smear test Other reasons… 14%

How long did you wait to be seen? Key findings: The majority of respondents (77%, n= 53) waited 29 minutes or less to be seen. This is higher than last year of 69%. 19% (n= 13) of respondents waited between 30 – 59 minutes to be seen. Last year 2% of respondents stated that they waited for more than 2 hours. This year their was no-one waiting over 2 hours. How long do you feel is an acceptable time to wait? Key findings: The majority of respondents (74%, n= 51) feel that up to 29 minutes is an acceptable waiting time. 22% (n= 15) state that between 30 – 59 minutes would be an acceptable wait. None of the respondents felt that a wait time over 1½ hours would be acceptable.

User satisfaction

The reception staff were friendly and approachable Key findings: 58% (n= 40) strongly agreed and 41% (n= 28) agreed that the reception staff were friendly and approachable. No respondents disagreed with this statement. I was given as much time as I needed Key findings: 59% (n= 41) strongly agreed and 35% (n= 24) agreed that they were given as much time as they needed. No respondents disagreed with the statement.

I am confident the clinic will keep my information confidential Key findings: 72% (n= 50) strongly agreed and 23% (n= 16) agreed that the clinic would keep their information confidential. 1% (n= 1) disagreed with this statement. I found out everything that I wanted to know Key findings: 65% (n= 45) strongly agreed and 29% (n= 20) agreed that they found out everything they needed to know. 1% (n= 1) disagreed with this statement.

I was made to feel comfortable answering personal questions Key findings: 67% (n= 46) strongly agreed and 29% (n= 20) agreed that they were made to feel comfortable answering personal questions. No respondents disagreed with this statement. No matter how long you wait, it is worth it Key findings: 55% (n= 38) strongly agreed and 26% (n= 18) agreed that no matter how long you wait, it is worth it. 12% (n= 8) disagreed and 1% (n= 1) strongly disagreed that no matter how long you wait, it is worth it.

I was listened to and felt valued Key findings: 65% (n= 45) strongly agreed and 29% (n= 20) agreed that they felt listened to and valued. 1% (n= 1) disagreed with this statement.

Was the main reason you went to the clinic today dealt with to your satisfaction? Key findings: 88% (n= 61) of respondents stated that the main reason for their visit was completely dealt with the their satisfaction. 10% (n=7) felt the reason for their visit was dealt to their satisfaction to some extent. No-one who visited the clinic felt that the reason for the visit wasn’t dealt with to their satisfaction. Overall, how would you rate the care you received today? Key findings: 71% (n= 49) of respondents stated that the care they received was excellent. 23% (n=16) stated the care they received was very good. 3% (n= 2) stated the care they received was good and 1% (n= 1) stated the care they received was fair. No respondents stated the care they received as poor.

Would you attend the clinic again if you needed to? Key findings: 83% (n= 57) indicated they would definitely attend the clinic again. A further 14% (n= 10) said they would probably attend the clinic again. No-one said they would not attend the clinic again if they needed to. Would you recommend this clinic to a friend? Key findings: 84% (n= 58) would indicated they would definitely recommend this clinic to a friend. A further 13% (n= 9) said they would probably recommend this clinic to a friend. No-one said they would not recommend the clinic to a friend.

Try not to double book appointments. It's frustrating to be told you are the FIRST appointment (having booked as early as possible to get to work) then to see other people go in before you! Can't get appointments when we want to. They give very late appointments like 5 weeks after which is not OK. Should sort problems out soon as possible. I wait for mine 7 months. Appointments Please tell us how we could improve our services: Improve waiting times Make the waiting time shorter because I waited for ages. Less waiting time. A text check in service, to ensure parking fees are not wasted. Text waiting times - delay. Fantastic and very helpful. Waiting area I don't think you can, the building is a lot better than the last one. Staff are all lovely. Waiting room maybe needs to be a little more user friendly. Need vending machines, I got hungry waiting. More magazines and maybe a TV to stare at.

Nothing. Service takes into account daughter's autism and allows earliest appointment for this. Thank you. There's nothing that needs improving, everything is excellent here, you get the right help you need and ask for. I don't feel it can be improved upon Dr Ali was very nice and friendly. It’s brilliant! The Doctor was very good. Compliments received

Next steps: ActionPerson responsible By when

Feedback to service users Website Patient Information Folders