Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract Background The aim of this survey was to valuate patient’s satisfaction with a Frailty Intervention Therapy Team (FITT) and gain insight into their thoughts about the service. Patients’ feedback is a vital component in monitoring and improving the quality of care. The data collected will help develop the service ensuring it’s patient centred and tailored to their needs. Methods A qualitative approach was taken in the form of a patient satisfaction survey. To limit bias responses, non-patient facing clerical facilitated the completion of the questionnaire with the patient. Results 27 surveys were administered over a 5-week period with an 81% response rate (n=22). 91% of patients surveyed felt the purpose of the FITT service was clearly explained to them, the team member had clearly introduced themselves and the team used both written and verbal information well –indicating an effective and efficient style of communication. 100% of patients reported that FITT treated them with dignity and respect. 18% of patients reported they were not involved in decision making relating to the care they received. The ED environment was rated as poor by 14% of patients, long wait time to be seen was also a concern. While some areas of patient concerns cannot be directly targeted by the team alone, we have a duty of care to highlight these concerns to the wider ED staff and hospital group. Conclusion A ‘what matters to you’ question has been incorporated into the assessment paperwork, to ensure patients’ wishes are being formally captured and placed centrally within care management planning. Communication to the patient was supported by providing a FITT information leaflet. Additional seating was procured by FITT to promote improvements in comfort and facilitate safe transfers of older patients in the ED. Patient feedback was presented to the ED governance group, including major themes of patient concern.
Maher et al. (Sun,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: