MINUTES OF THE PATIENT REFERENCE GROUP 0N Thursday 12th January 2012
The meeting took place at Broomhill Surgery
Those present:Val Barnsley
Bessie Uttley
Josie Smith
Paul Cocker
Robert Kilvington
Chris Henriksen
Chris Sandham
Edwin Self
Bernard Kingston
Martin McKervey
Dr David Savage – Chair
Dr Chris Parry
Valeria Taylor - Minutes
Introduction
The practice welcomed all attendees and everyone had the opportunity to introduce themselves.
Dr Savage gave an overview of the need for a Patient Reference Group (PRG) and the rational
behind its existence and that this is a Department of Health initiative for practices. There was
general discussion regarding the direction of the group, the future and the time scales for
achieving results from a proposed patient survey. It was also noted that any survey action plan
needs to be achievable and therefore the survey ought to reflect that in the proposed
questioning. The Patient Reference Group may wish to elaborate the good things in the practice
and also to develop practical and achievable improvements for patients.
The demographics of the PRG was discussed and it was highlighted that certain patient groups
were under represented. It was discussed methods to try and readdress this. Initially it was
agreed to put a further advert within the practice receptions. It was also suggested to ask a
specific question on the patient satisfaction questionnaire relating to whether patients would
like to join the PRG at a later date. It was also agreed there would be a reserve list of
candidates and that patients could rotate their role within the PRG to allow other patients the
opportunity to join.
The following agenda items were compiled as local issues that could potentially be debated by
the Reference Group in the future and form part of any action plan.
Agenda Items
1. Practice appointments and waiting times. This issue was raised by CS along with access
to the prescription line especially at the Lodge Moor Surgery. In response Dr Savage
replied that as a result of the newly formed group, this could be an area for further
discussion and inclusion in a survey. There was a suggestion that repeat medications
could be collected from local pharmacies and maybe something to consider in the
action plan for patients to comment on. The group was informed that many practices in
Agenda doc
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
the city no longer have a telephone prescription line service and patients are therefore
expected to send in their prescription requests to their surgery by post. Broomhill &
Lodge Moor Surgeries are exceptions in offering a telephone service every day. The
emphasis of the discussion was about working smarter in practice and to improve the
service. Another suggestion was the implementation of an electronic prescription line in
the future.
Access (telephone). PC suggested that this was an important issue and one that the
group would look at more closely. An overview of the practice appointment system was
discussed. This is another area for consideration in future surveys. Some electronic
appointments may be an option in the future.
Out of area patients. Dr Savage gave an explanation of the latest guidelines from the
DOH on surgery boundaries and how best to deal with patients who are registered with
the practice but whose address falls outside the practice boundary. The practice has a
number of such patients. The PRG could be a useful forum in discussing this sensitive
area.
The practice list closure. The PRG was made aware of the recent list closure and the
capacity issues that face the practice. The list almost reached 9000 patients this year; an
increase in 3000 patients in the last 10 to 15 years. How should the practice deal with
this issue? The current list size is now 8650 patients.
The practice referral rates. The PRG was provided with a small spreadsheet
highlighting the fact that the Broomhill & Lodge Moor Surgeries are one of the highest
referring surgeries in the West Consortium, of which we are a member practice. Dr
Savage gave an overview of the practice’s patient population and potential reasons for
the high referral rates, in areas such as dermatology.
Dealing with practice complaints. It was felt that the PRG might play an important role
with practice complaints in the future.
How and what to survey. There was general discussion around the question of how the
survey should look, who to target in the practice population and what questions to ask.
The following comments were included in the discussion: The PRG felt that a breakdown of the practice demographics would be useful in
terms of age and sex, (see Appendix 1). This would help in deciding who to
target, although it was thought it would be good to include the younger
population as well.
 It was agreed to keep the survey simple initially partly due to the timescales and
perhaps to explore a range of other issues in more depth at a later date.
 Not to ask leading questions and not to ask questions that cannot be practically
resolved.
 Several members of the Group suggested that help from outside agencies might
be useful in helping to put the questionnaire together. However, because of the
decision to keep the survey relatively simple and short and with no cost to the
practice, Dr Parry agreed to develop a draft questionnaire to be ready over the
coming week. This will be emailed out to all members for their approval. VB
offered to collect both her copy and BU’s copy of the questionnaire from the
surgery. It was noted that BK kindly offered the services of SHARR in the
future.
Other comments
 The PRG would like to use the practice (annual) newsletter as a forum for PRG matters
and articles. All agreed this was a good idea.
Agenda doc
 Mr CS highlighted some errors on the practice NHS Choices website which the practice
manager will look at and resolve.
 Once the draft questionnaire has been approved by the PRG, it will be sent out to the
target population. It will also be placed on the new practice website. The results and an
action plan from the survey will be published on the new website also and a copy will
be sent to the PCT.
 It was proposed that the PRG met again early in March. The date has yet to be
confirmed.
Appendix 1
Age / Sex Breakdown of Practice Population at October 2011
Age Group 0 – 4
Age Group 5 – 14
Age Group 15 – 44
Age Group 45 – 64
Age Group 65 – 74
Age Group 75 – 84
Age Group 85+
Male
221
491
1530
1193
438
326
100
Total patient number - 8740
Agenda doc
Female
236
456
1604
1076
487
391
191