Inbox

Taking patient feedback seriously

I e-mailed the Patients Association some while ago about my experience with a patient survey carried out when I was a member of my local PPG.

Over the years, many changes had taken place on how patients accessed appointments. Large numbers of patients had made it know that they were not happy with the systems being put in place, including personal and sensitive health details having to be given to receptionists, rudeness from receptionists, difficulty in accessing appointments with their GPs and the feeling that the relationship between patient/GP was breaking down. The telephone system installed had also caused problems for patients getting through in the first place: long delays trying to get through, phones misdirected.

There were also problems with phone-backs from GPs/nurses, as many patients have commitments that make these difficult. A number of other comments arose out of asking patients about their views on getting an appointment in the first instance in terms of 'what on earth are GPs doing getting a lot more money for doing less', 'we (patients) do not seem to have any rights anymore'.

My view is that the standard form asking 'were you happy with your appointment' was too limited. We were asked to interview patients when they came out of seeing their GP/nurse. All 10 who I interviewed were happy with the response they got when they actually saw their GP/nurse: one had a pre-planned appointment, nine were very unhappy with the procedure in getting the appointment in the first place for the reasons above.

Other PPG members carrying out the survey also had a similar response. At a later meeting of the PPG when the data had been assessed, the practice manager said she was ‘pleasantly surprised’ that the survey had shown almost 100% satisfaction with getting an appointment.

I am not sure any notice was taken when PPG members who had taken part in the survey said their experience of questioning patients did not support this general statement. In fact we were accused of being 'negative' in raising the issue.

This raises questions over whether it is right for practices to both carry out and compile the data, which it is in their own interests to ensure has a positive outcome. (Your article raises this).

Your article on patient validation raises many issues that I experienced. I felt that the PPG I was a member of was seen as an extension of the practice, having no input into what the practice had already decided in terms of services to patients. After a year I resigned as I feel that PPGs should first and foremost represent patients’ views and then work alongside the practice to make sure patient views are heard and taken into consideration when policy/services are being decided. This does not have to be adversarial but it needs practice managers to realise that PPGs are not ‘tokens’ and need to be taken seriously as a voice for patients.

I do feel that PPGs should be given a more important role vis-a viz their practices, funded to contact patients directly and having established terms of reference of good practice perhaps set by the CCG . (I recognise there are some positive PPGs). I also think data collection should not be with the practice.

I think your article raises serious questions about whether patients are really having any say in future healthcare and whilst I realise I have had a bad experience I am optimistic that what is happening and being highlighted through yourselves, PPG network, CCG and other groups patients can be ensured more say in their future healthcare.

Re: The role of patient feedback in revalidation