Standard Reporting Template

Devon, Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Area Team

2015/16 Patient Participation Enhanced Service – Reporting Template

Practice Name: ST. NEOT’S SURGERY

Practice Code: L83046

Signed on behalf of practice: Dr. William Davies (PPG GP Lead) Date: 31/3/16

Signed on behalf of PPG: Susan Mathews (PPG Chair) Date: 31/3/16

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

Does the Practice have a PPG? YES
Method of engagement with PPG: Face to face, Email, Other (please specify) Primarily face to face
Number of members of PPG: 6
Detail the gender mix of practice population and PPG:
% / Male / Female
Practice / 5003 / 5353
PRG / 5 / 1
/ Detail of age mix of practice population and PPG: (FRESH SEARCH DONE 2016 AS PRACTICE LIST SIZE HAS CHANGED)
% / <16 / 17-24 / 25-34 / 35-44 / 45-54 / 55-64 / 65-74 / > 75
Practice / 2216 / 1048 / 1446 / 1221 / 1434 / 1308 / 891 / 774
PRG / 0 / 0 / 1 / 0 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 2
Detail the ethnic background of your practice population and PRG: (Note not full practice population has ethnicity recorded- total recorded on setup of PPG = 7254 and mixed race was not part of the classification)
White / Mixed/ multiple ethnic groups
British or Irish / Irish / Gypsy or Irish traveller / Other white / White &black Caribbean / White &black African / White &Asian / Other mixed
Practice / 5901 / 1 / 0 / 995 / 9 / 13 / 7 / N/A
PRG / 6 / N/A / N/A / 0 / N/A / N/A / N/A / N/A
Asian/Asian British / Black/African/Caribbean/Black British / Other
Indian / Pakistani / Bangladeshi / Chinese / Other
Asian / African / Caribbean / Other Black / Arab / Any other
Practice / 11 / 10 / 7 / 19 / 20 / 16 / 5 / 10 / 1 / N/A
PRG / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
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:
3 years ago we attempted to set up a virtual e-mail group to obtain a more diverse spread, unfortunately there was not as much feedback from the group as we would like. We therefore made the conscious decision to continue the patient survey this year, despite it not being a mandatory requirement to allow us to target more the practice population with a non British/Irish ethnicity recorded. Here is the raw data for the 2016 responses
White British or Irish / 226
Polish / 1
Other White Background (state below) / 5
Chinese / 1
Afro-Caribbean / 1
Asian / 1
Any Other Ethnic Group (state below) / 0
So although still below the coded proportions, we have managed to get a degree of representation (some may have not recorded their ethnicity) and there is plenty of opportunity within the survey to collate free text opinions/views.
Actively canvassing for responses in the 2016 survey through members of the patient group handing out questionnaires was helpful as it enabled us to target female responses and a range of age ranges to help counteract any imbalance in the demographics of the practice population vs the patient group population. We were certainly successful in that case as per last year, obtaining more female responses than male responses, and certainly a broader variety of age ranges
Q19: Are you male or female?
Male / 78
Female / 160
Q20: How old are you?
Under 18 / 7
18 to 24 / 33
25 to 34 / 51
35 to 44 / 29
45 to 54 / 29
55 to 64 / 33
65 to 74 / 32
75 to 84 / 15
85 or over / 7
Are there any specific characteristics of your practice population which means that other groups should be included in the PPG?
e.g. a large student population, significant number of jobseekers, large numbers of nursing homes, or a LGBT community?
No, the practice population is relatively monocultural but quite varied in terms of economic activity, age etc. (see Patient Survey 2016 result)

2.  Review of patient feedback

Outline the sources of feedback that were reviewed during the year:
Main feedback has been from the 2015 and 2016 Patient Survey, whereby we have kept similar themes throughout in response to feedback (satisfaction regarding GP/Nurse/Reception) and focusing on priority areas as they become evident, often through free text comments informing the following survey, such as privacy and telephone access.
Overall the Patient Survey 2016 has been a positive result again, with satisfaction being maintained despite static investment and good response to our target of increasing staff professionalism through use of uniform. It is heartening that 78% of patients agree that with the targets that have been set with regards to moving into the new build, that online usage continues to develop and there is support for our new eConsultation service.
It is clear though, particularly through the free text comments that we cannot rest on our laurels with regards to privacy at Reception (the open plan nature of the new build). We were unable to properly deal with the telephone message from the 2015 plan, however we have useful additional data that a call queuing system will be appreciated so we can combine this with our desire to advertise eConsultations more to really make an impression on improving the patient experience. Meetings are scheduled with South West telecoms in April and ongoing liaison with Microtest our system supplier to deal with the phone system and desire for background music respectedly and I would expect both to be finalised before the end of the year.
We have also informally looked at the result of the Friends and Family Results since inception which have shown similar comments to the Patient Survey.
Additional feedback can be given ad hoc at each meeting and carried back to the partners meeting.
We are also advertised online and can be contacted on our dedicated e-mail address. One of our PPG members is a carer so we have good perspective on that front and have also sent surveys to homes in the past via nurses/key workers so that housebound patients are not left out.
We also were keen to find out views of other groups last year through attending the Patient Association event to help us grow forward.
We reviewed the status of the 2015 action plan as the year went on and here is the current status
2015 Plan
1. Introduce privacy line to improve patient experience in new build (achieved, further work for 2016 plan in terms of screen behind Reception)
2. Introduce patient call system with effective promotion and expansion of Patient Group (call screen in place)
3. Reduce length of telephone message (further data collected from 2016 surgery- should be achieved by 2017)
4. Consider lunchtime opening (on hold for now until staffing/investment permits)
How frequently were these reviewed with the PRG? Meeting approximately every 6 weeks. Survey carried out and reported on annually.

3.  Action plan priority areas and implementation (2016 onwards- to achieve by 2017- 2015 plans detailed above)

Priority area 1
Description of priority area:
Improving privacy at Reception through planning of screen behind front desk, background music on call screens and queue management
What actions were taken to address the priority?
Survey to check privacy still a problem. PRS license purchased. Canvassing amongst partners that screen likely to be best idea. Communication has occurred from GP patient group lead to Microtest to ensure MP3 playing possible alongside patient call screen presentation. Feedback to Reception to encourage more flexibility in dealing with large queues (extra staff at desk at peak times)
Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):
Survey results published. Increased privacy will improve well-being with regards to patients using reception and feeling reception more focused on their needs, and help combat the pitfalls of and open plan reception
Priority area 2
Description of priority area: Improving telephone access and promotion of eConsult would be worthwhile
What actions were taken to address the priority?
Survey to check if call queuing system would be appreciated and patients open to eConsults (there were on both counts in 2016 survey). Meeting organised with South West telecoms for April to begin to put this in place. Existing telephone message has been transcribed in order to edit.
Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised):
Plan to reduce frustration with regards to being put on hold without knowing place in queue, and at the same time being effectively signposted to use online resources if appropriate for their needs.
Priority area 3
Description of priority area: Improving local practice: pharmacy interface. Discussion with patient group members following informal chat with prescribing clerks regarding complaints received at desk. Together with some free text comments and anecdotal evidence the overall picture indicates relations with main pharmacy should be better, particularly after being taken over by new management company.
What actions were taken to address the priority? Patient Group Lead has recently received details of area manager to discuss how to improve communication particularly with regards to EPS, medication changes and complete repeats. Meeting to be arranged via Practice Manager. Medicines Management team has also been made aware of the issues and agreed to release funding if necessary
Result of actions and impact on patients and carers (including how publicised): A co-ordinated approach should help strengthen the practice-pharmacy interface and reduce inconvenience and complaints from patients that have to shuttle between the two parties.

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):


4.  PPG Sign Off

Report signed off by PPG: YES
Date of sign off: 31-3-15
How has the practice engaged with the PPG:
How has the practice made efforts to engage with seldom heard groups in the practice population?
Has the practice received patient and carer feedback from a variety of sources?
Was the PPG involved in the agreement of priority areas and the resulting action plan?
How has the service offered to patients and carers improved as a result of the implementation of the action plan?
Do you have any other comments about the PPG or practice in relation to this area of work?
In terms of practice vs PPG engagement- the engagement is very tight and has been for many years- each meeting is attended by the GP responsible for the PPG (Dr. Davies) and 1 x administerial support. The success of the rolling surveys encouraged us all keep going with it, despite it being no longer mandatory.
The variety of sources include use of active targeting of patient surveys at under-represented groups (see Section 1), allowing carers to complete surveys by proxy and through patient group members handing them out it person and being given to visiting district nurses going on home visits. The Friends and Family Test has also helped in this regard. Any comments that are placed in the practice suggestion box directly relevant to the Patient Group are forwarded to the next meeting to consider. Also the patient group has a section on the surgery website http://www.stneotssurgery.co.uk/ppg.aspx that can be used to receive comments online.
The PPG was fully involved in agreement of priority areas and action plan- was openly discussed before the surveys in the design phase, during and after prior to preparation of the report.
On http://www.stneotssurgery.co.uk/ppg/aspx and above you can see how the survey results have evolved over the years, how the action plans have been formulated by the survey results, services have improved and overall satisfaction levels have risen despite static funding.
Overall we have been proud how the integration between the practice and the PPG has been maintained and how we have maintained consistent, plentiful and useful feedback over the years through the continuing surveys and regular meetings.
The focus is now on adapting our shiny new build to fit the core patient needs (access, reception, scripts)