Inpatient experience survey 2016, volume 3: exploring differences in experience
This report explores the differences in self-reported experience of people who responded to the inpatient experience survey 2016.
Results - Staff
Summary
The survey results show that overall people were largely positive about their experiences of hospital staff, 91 per cent were positive about the staff they came into contact with.
All the characteristics investigated indicated a significant impact on differences seen in responses relating to people's experience of the hospital staff.
In general older people, males and those staying in general and other type hospitals are significantly more positive about the staff they came into contact with.
People reporting fair or poor health and those who were admitted as an emergency are significantly more negative. People living in SIMD 4 or SIMD 5 (least deprived) are significantly more negative when asked about nurses or other staff they came into contact with.
Staff
Nineteen of the survey questions relate to people's experience of the staff they came into contact with during their stay. All characteristics investigated are associated with variation seen for these questions (Figure 8).
Figure 8: Number of questions affected by various characteristics - staff
Doctors
All characteristics related to questions on doctors are detailed in Table 11. Males and people aged over 45 are significantly more positive than the reference groups for questions regarding how they felt they were treated by doctors.
People with emergency admissions were significantly more negative than those who had a planned admission for all questions related to doctors. Those reporting fair or poor health were significantly more negative than those reporting good health, which was also reflected in the pre-existing health conditions.
As seen with some other aspects of the survey, people living in SIMD 4 or SIMD 5 (least deprived) areas were significantly more negative for questions relating to whether doctors listened to patient concerns or washed their hands.
People who require an interpreter or help with communicating, were significantly more negative for four of the six questions on doctors.
Nurses
All characteristics related to questions on nurses are detailed in Table 12. Males and people aged over 55 are significantly more positive than the reference groups for questions regarding how they felt and were treated by nurses.
People with emergency admissions were significantly more negative than those who had a planned admission for all questions related to nurses. People reporting fair or poor health were significantly more negative which is reflected in the pre-existing health conditions.
The characteristic SIMD 2016 explains some of the differences seen in response for five of the six of questions on nurses, compared to two out of six questions on doctors.
All staff
All characteristics related to questions on all staff are detailed in Table 13. As seen in other areas of staffing, males and people aged over 45 were significantly more positive when asked questions about all the staff they came into contact with.
People with emergency admissions were significantly more negative that those with planned admissions for six of the seven questions asked. People reporting fair or poor health were also significantly more negative than those reporting good health.
People who stayed in general and other type of hospitals were significantly more positive than those staying in teaching hospitals. The opposite is seen for those staying in larger general hospitals, who are significantly more negative.
Table 11: Significant response compared to reference group - doctors
Question |
Positive |
Negative |
---|---|---|
Knew enough about condition and treatment |
Had an operation; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Discussed condition and treatment in away patient could understand |
Had an operation; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Didn't talk as if patient wasn't there |
Emergency admissions; |
Emergency admissions; |
Listened if any questions or concerns |
Age 45-75+; |
Emergency and something else admission; |
Washed/cleaned their hands at appropriate times |
Males; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Confidence and trust in the doctors |
Had an operation; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Table 12: Significant response compared to reference group - nurses
Question |
Positive |
Negative |
---|---|---|
Knew enough about condition and treatment |
Has an operation; |
Emergency admissions; |
Discussed condition and treatment in away patient could understand |
Age 55-74; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Didn't talk as if patient wasn't there |
Age 55-75+ |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Listened if any questions or concerns |
Age 55-75+; |
Emergency admissions; |
Washed/cleaned their hands at appropriate times |
Males; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Confidence and trust in the nurses |
Age 65-75+; |
Emergency admissions; |
Table 13: Significant response compared to reference group - all staff
Question |
Positive |
Negative |
---|---|---|
Know which nurse was in charge |
Had an operation; |
Fair and poor health; |
Were there enough nurses on duty |
Age 65-75+; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Staff worked well together |
Age 45-75+; |
Emergency and something else admission; |
Staff took account of the things that mattered to you |
Age 55-75+; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Enough emotional support from staff during your stay |
Age 45-75+; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Treated with compassion and understanding |
Age 45-75+; |
Emergency admissions; |
Overall, rate all the staff who you came into contact with |
Age 45-75+; |
Emergency and something else admissions; |
Contact
Email: Nicola Kerr
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback