Stoma Appliance Service in the Community: Stoma Care Quality and Cost Effectiveness Review 2015

4. Respondents

4.1 All of the 14 territorial NHS Boards were requested to participate, with all Boards subsequently contributing to the agreed process. Each NHS Board co-ordinated responses from patients, NHS Board staff involved in stoma care services, Dispensing Appliance Contractors (DACs) and community pharmacy contractors, and manufacturers known to operate in their NHS Board area.

Response levels

4.2 A total of 962 responses were submitted across the four levels of the quality audit. The level of response across each of these groupings is set out in the table below:

Patients/Carers

4.3 With regard to the patient responses, separate contributions were received from other sources complementary to the process. These included 45 completed patient survey questionnaires co-ordinated through the patient support group the Urostomy Association and through the manufacturer Coloplast UK, who distributed copies of the patient/carer survey questionnaire to the cohort of patients they supply directly to across Scotland.

Dispensing Appliance Contractors and Community Pharmacies

4.4 Ostomy patients resident in the Western Isles rely on a mainland DAC provider for their requirements with associated activity incorporated into the final totals. It should also be noted that some DACs supply to patients in more than one NHS Board area, but may have opted to make a collective submission in response to only one Board's survey. This may explain why fewer returns appear to have been received from DACs compared to community pharmacies where individual responses were received. Conversely, it was possible for DACs to respond to more than one NHS Board data gathering activity.

NHS Staff Teams

4.5 Not all NHS Boards submitted a staff return, particularly where patient populations are small and service arrangements, planning and the need for local stoma fora are scaled and applied proportionately to local circumstances. In addition, some staff returns may have been from an individual while others may have been a team response. It is difficult to be precise about this based on the information contained in the completed audit pro forma submitted.