Introduction - NHS Nottingham City€¦ · Web viewDilated Cardiomyopathy and Diabetes spinal stenosis and paralysis of legs diminishing vision and hearing wheelchair user. hearing

Ear Nose and Throat and Audiology Engagement Report

Patient Feedback

Greater Nottingham Clinical Commissioning Partnership

1ENT & Audiology Report 22/05/2023

Contents

1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................3

1. Background.......................................................................................................................3

2. Engagement Methodology & Feedback............................................................................4

Structure of Engagement..............................................................................................4

Analysing the Feedback................................................................................................5

3. Questions..........................................................................................................................6

Geography...............................................................................................................................6

Availability and purpose...........................................................................................................7

Additional information offered by respondents.......................................................................12

4. Equal Opportunities Monitoring...................................................................................13

5. Appendix 1 – Circulation of questionnaire......................................................................18

6. Appendix 2 – thematic groupings for clinic access times............................................19

7. Appendix 3 – thematic groupings for types of follow up appointments preferred........21

8. Appendix 4: Anything else about your experiences you feel would help with this review?...................................................................................................................................23


1. Introduction

It has been considered that certain Ear, Nose and Throat and Audiology procedures and

treatments which are currently out of scope of General Practice in Primary Care could be

done within a community clinic instead of taking place in secondary or specialist settings.

There are also currently some procedures that could be delivered within the scope of

general practice.

The Greater Nottingham Clinical Commissioning Partnership is currently scoping the

potential development of a Community based Ear, Nose and Throat and Audiology service.

The aims of community based services are to ensure equity of access to these services

across the Greater Nottingham footprint.

1. Background

Currently all Ear, Nose and Throat and Audiology services outside of scope of Primary Care

are delivered in secondary care across the Greater Nottingham footprint. Primary Care do

deliver an ear irrigation service for wax removal where appropriate. Whilst within Mansfield &

Ashfield (Mid Nottinghamshire) there is currently a micro-suction service there is no

provision of a micro-suction service consistently across Primary Care within Greater

Nottingham.

Commissioning within the Greater Nottingham Clinical Commissioning Partnership have

identified the benefit of a community based, clinical triage function. This could allow patients

to be seen in the right place, right time first time. A stakeholder workshop is being held to

encourage provider feedback on their experience of patient pathways to offer the best

patient pathway in developing a local Ear, Nose, Throat and Audiology model which would

also input into a potential Integrated Care System model for Nottingham and

Nottinghamshire. Initial scoping has identified the benefit of an Audiology/Otology community

service and this will be worked up further from the output of the September workshop.


2. Engagement Methodology & Feedback

Structure of EngagementThe engagement was structured around a single questionnaire which was circulated digitally

and face to face in Ear, Nose and Throat and Audiology clinic settings. The standard

questionnaire format allowed us to collate and compare a large set of responses to

understand what was important to users of these services. Appendix 1 lists the circulation list

for the digital survey and also the clinic locations where interviews with service users, carers

and family members took place.

The face to face engagement was carried out spontaneously during clinic time and the

service users were not pre-selected. The engagement team approached individuals and

asked if they would like to take part in the engagement questionnaire and share their

experiences. At this point they were invited to either complete the survey by hand or to have

the survey read out and talked through by a member of the Engagement team.

Overall we received 183 responses and this comprised of both methods of engagement.

The majority of respondents, 162 in total, confirmed they had used the services personally

with an additional 4 unsure if they had in the past and 17 were completing the survey as a

supporter of the service or a service user.


Analysing the Feedback

The questionnaire comprised of four questions relating to how patients accessed the service,

where patients accessed the service from and how they preferred appointments to be

structured. We also asked further questions relating to the background of the respondent

and invited comments in relation to the questions asked and generally their thoughts and

experience in this type of service. We also asked all respondents to complete a separate set

of questions relating to the own background, diversity and to ensure equal opportunity to

access services.

In order to analyse the feedback, responses from each question were reviewed and where

free text responses were offered these have been placed into themes where possible.

At the end of the survey we invited anyone interested in knowing more about the outcomes

of the survey or being involved in future work with the Clinical Commissioning Group to

provide us with an email address for future contact.

We have collated 56 email addresses and we would like to provide an update with the

outcomes of the survey and any “next steps” once a timeline for this work is confirmed.

A complete PDF of all 183 responses collected digitally will be made available to the service team in addition to this report.


3. Questions

Geography

Where do you live?

Of the 180 responses to this question, 40 of the responses quoted out of area post codes.

Some post codes were from neighbouring counties and some from further afield. The

complete list of the out of area postcodes is:

Out of area responsesCV32 NG10DE7 LE12DE72 LE15DE74 NG16DE74 NG13GU47 NG31S43 NG34S70

For all responses relating to Nottingham and Nottinghamshire postcodes we have provided

below a breakdown the responses according to their Locality within the Nottingham and

Nottinghamshire footprint.

City Mid Notts NNE Rushcliffe West0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45


Availability and purpose

Where would you like to be seen for your Ear, Nose and Throat or Audiology appointment?

Respondents to the survey were offered a list of preferred locations for the appointments

and were invited to rank these options from 1 being the preferred location and 4 being the

least preferable to attend. There was no further option to comment on the reasons why these

choices had been made and 174 of the full 183 responded to this question. The GP practice

of the patient was the overall preferred location with hospital settings being a second

alternative.

Hospital My GP practice Other GP practice local to home

Community venue0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Clinic and appointment times:

Some grouped times were offered as options within the survey and people were invited to

select which times of the day were more important to them for appointment times.

The groupings offered were:

In the early morning, in the evening, at the weekend and at any other time of the day


Other comments provided

Comments were also invited for respondents to elaborate on their choice or offer alternative

preferences to help us understand the demand and preference on appointment times.

Fifty eight individual detailed comments were received offering more detail on this question

and key themes were clear when analysing this additional feedback.

The themes were heavily weighted towards three areas;

appointments outside of working hours for the working age population

appointments in the middle of the day for non-working people and

being flexible around the need of the person and purpose of the appointment

This resulted in there being no clear consensus in one particular option but these three key

groups could be considered when planning this type of service.

Reasons cited for middle of the day times include the ability to use Senior citizen bus passes

after 10am, to avoid morning rush hour and late afternoon traffic congestion. This clearly

relates to the location of the services provided (currently delivered at Ropewalk House,

Nottingham city centre or QMC, Nottingham University Hospitals) both in high traffic areas

for commuters and specific times of day.


In the early morning

In the evening At the weekend

At an other time of day

0.00%5.00%

10.00%15.00%20.00%25.00%30.00%35.00%40.00%45.00%50.00%

How important is it for you to have clinic times:

Extremely importantImportantNeutralNot very importantNot at all important

The volume of responses keen to see appointments in late morning, midday and early

afternoon also coincided with the number of overall responses received from people who

identified as within the 65+ age bracket.

0-17 18-30 31-65 65 and over Prefer not to say

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

Age of respondents

For those with an interest in access for working age people clear suggestions were offered

of wanting flexibility in choice around working hours or fixed appointments outside ‘standard’

working hours.

Finally the third theme visible in the additional comments of the survey related to access to

these services being flexible to suit both the needs of the patient and the requirements and

availability of the service. As these were more individualised responses we have included

the full breakdown of all responses grouped thematically Appendix 2.

When accessing an Ear Nose or Throat or Audiology type of appointment would you prefer?

Within the survey the participants were asked if they had a preference towards attending

appointments that offered a longer but “one stop shop” type of opportunity within the

appointment or if they would prefer initial appointments to discuss diagnosis, concerns with

further follow up appointments offered separately.

The majority of responses received denoted a weighted preference towards a single

appointment model. A total of 174 individual responses to this question were collected with

133 of the responses selecting this same day appointment method. Eleven of the 174 stated


they were unsure and the remaining 32 confirming a preference towards “an initial

appointment with an opportunity to talk through symptoms and concerns with probably

diagnosis before any further appointments for screening / procedures or treatment.”

One Stop Shop Single appointments with follow ups as required

Not sure0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

When accessing an ENT or Audiology appointment which type of appointment would you prefer?

If you require any follow up appointments do you prefer?

We offered those surveyed the choice of the following four responses to this question:

A follow up appointment face to face

A follow up appointment by telephone at first

A follow up appointment by email at first

Not sure

Then we invited any other comments as a fifth option.

With 176 responses received in this question, we found that 129 people pointed towards

face to face being the preferred method of follow up with the service. This is not altogether

surprising given the intervention need for many of the appointments, hearing aid checks,

hearing tests, balance checks etc.


Face t

o fac

e

telep

hone

at fir

st

email

at fir

st

Not su

re

Other c

ommen

ts off

ered

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

Other comments

Additional comments were invited on this survey question and many comments were added

by the survey respondents. The responses identified the breadth of the services offered

within ENT and Audiology appointments and some responses pointed to the answer being

very dependent on the purpose of the individual follow up.

However these comments can be grouped into themes. Encouragingly there were a number

of responses addressing positive technology solutions and a desire to engage with

technology and alternative solutions.

A full list of these responses can be found in Appendix 3 within this document and the

responses have been grouped in to: positively engaging with technology and reducing

unnecessary travel, the need for face to face appointments due to health conditions,

accessibility needs and appointment purpose, being flexibility between all options and only

one response expressed concern with using too much technology in healthcare.


Additional information offered by respondents

At the end of the survey we asked all respondents if they wished to offer any further

information in relation to the services provided or anything they felt would be relevant to this

survey. The complete feedback to this question can be found at the end of this report within

Appendix 4 and the responses followed a number of themes.

Some contained comments and recommendations which are outside the scope of the CCG

work such as equipment used by patients and individuals offering information relating to

individual clinical cases. However we have retained this feedback and included within the

thematic groupings at the end of this document.

One helpful theme is location of services and we received a number of comments about the

Ropewalk clinic specifically. There was a positive feedback on the quality of the services and

the calibre of the staff however the location was acknowledged as hard to access on foot

and car parking being difficult and expensive. There were also suggestions of accessing

some of these services, such as ear irrigation, locally within Practice settings rather than

travelling to the Ropewalk, avoiding this location altogether. Also for patients with hearing

impairments the venue, acoustics and facilities can be uncomfortable. Feedback suggested

the location is not as accessible as it could be for deaf patients; with limited staff with BSL

language skills, appointments called out verbally without accompanying written signage and

access to BSL interpreters not being well aligned to clinical appointment times all being cited

within the feedback.

There were comments highlighting the gaps between these services and the Primary Care

gateway. Suggestions were made such as self-referrals to parts of the service including

repeated de-waxing, ear irrigation and hearing aid check-ups. Comments suggested a better

connection between Primary Care administration and service administration could improve

the patient experience.

Overall provider feedback was positive with some negatives and this has all been collated in

Appendix 4 to pass to providers.


4. Equal Opportunities Monitoring

Gender: (Answered 169 – skipped 14)

Male Female Prefer not to say0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

Is your gender the same as the gender you were originally assigned at birth: (Answered 169 – skipped 14)

Yes No Prefer not to say0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

120.00%


Ethnic Origin: (Answered 172 – skipped 11)

White B

ritish

White I

rish

Any ot

her W

hite b

ackg

round

(inclu

ding T

ravell

er)

White &

Blac

k Cari

bbea

n

White &

Blac

k Afric

an

White &

Asia

n

Other m

ixed

Asian/A

sian B

ritish

India

n

Asian/A

sian B

ritish

Pak

istan

i

Asian/A

sian B

ritish

Ban

glade

shi

Asian/A

sian B

ritish

othe

r

Black o

r Blac

k Briti

sh A

frica

Black o

r Blac

k Briti

sh C

aribb

ean

Black o

r Blac

k Briti

sh ot

her

Prefer

not to

say

Other e

thnic

group

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

Age: (Answered 172 – skipped 11)

0-17 18-30 31-65 65 and over Prefer not to say

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%


Do you consider yourself to have a disability or a long term condition:

(Answered 171 – skipped 12)

Yes No Prefer not to say If yes, please specify0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

30.00%

35.00%

40.00%

45.00%

Respondents were invited to specify any conditions they wished to help inform us on this question and all the long term conditions and disabilities specified were as follows.

AMD Hearing impairedAnkylosing Spondylitis, Diabetes 2, Asthma Hearing lossArthritis hearing, heart valveArthritis Osteo & Ruematoid HeartArthritis, blind in one eye, heart problems and more

Heart failure/ vascular dementia

Arthritis. Osteoarthritis. Soft tissue arthritis. Vestibular disorders ( ears) balance.deaf issues from birth.

Hidden hearing disability

Asthma Hypothyroidism, tinnitusAtrial fibrillation I don't knowAutism MeniersBad Back Multiple SclerosisChronic Fatigue Syndrome MyelomaCOPD osteoarthritis grade 4. fibromyalgia.

Raynauds. sleep apnoea.Coping struggles in general lifestyle poor hearing, slightly poor sightdeafness, balance, mental health Profound hearing lossdementia Physically disabled and dementiaDiabetes Right knee will not bendDifficulty in walking ScoliosisDilated Cardiomyopathy and Diabetes spinal stenosis and paralysis of legs


diminishing vision and hearing wheelchair user. hearing impaired. blind. chronically ill.

Epilepsy Hard of hearingfibro Hearing Disability

Sexual Orientation: (Answered 164 – skipped 19)

Heterosexual Gay Lesbian Bisexual Prefer not to say

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

Religion or belief (Answered 167 – skipped 16)

No reli

gion

Bahai

Christi

an Jain

Jewish

Hindu

Muslim Sikh

Prefer

not to

say

Other (p

lease

spec

ify)

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%


Marital / Civil Partnership Status: (Answered 169 – skipped 14)

Single

Married

Civil P

artne

rship

Divorce

d

Separa

ted

Widowed

Prefer

not to

say

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

Are you currently pregnant (Answered 161 – skipped 22)

Yes No Prefer not to say0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%


5. Appendix 1 – Circulation of questionnaire

Digital circulation list Mid Nottinghamshire PPG Members Practice Managers – Mid Nottinghamshire for cascading to PPG Members District Council Colleagues Local Authority Colleagues Greater Nottingham and Mid Nottinghamshire PPEC Members EMAHSN Colleagues Trusts NNE database Rushcliffe database Greater Nottingham database Rushcliffe RAPID group NNE PPG group Rushcliffe Borough Council Broxtowe Borough council Nottingham Deaf Society Social media feeds:

https://twitter.com/NHSNottingham/status/1184062642681454592 Clinical Commissioning Group Facebook pages

https://www.facebook.com/nhsnne/posts/3091315144218836:0NHS South NottsNHS Rushcliffe Clinical Commissioning GroupNHS Nottingham North and East CCGNHS Nottingham North and East Clinical Commissioning Group

Clinics attended: Ear Nose and Throat Clinic, QMC Nottingham University Hospital NHS Trust Audiology, Ropewalk House, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust


https://www.facebook.com/nhsnne/posts/3091315144218836:0

https://twitter.com/NHSNottingham/status/1184062642681454592

6. Appendix 2 – thematic groupings for clinic access times

Middle of the day After 11Between 11 - 1Week days after 10:00.Not too early af6ter 11am if possible10am to 4pm to avoid rush hour trafficSo can use bus pass on 1 hr. trip, 2 buses to get to Ropewalk after 10.30 bestmidday due to carer dutiesLate morningDue to distance to travel prefer middayI am retired and not at my best early morning and evenings. Between 10 a.m. and 3 p.m. is preferable.MiddayWould like around 10am - 3pm because of other health issues and allow rush hour traffic to go and access to bus lanes after 9.30

Not before 10.15 am so bus pass can be usedAfter 10.15 am due to busesAfter I can get to the Ropewalk with my senior bus pass.after 10am 1300hrs at the latestLike to attend in the middle of the day as it's best for trafficHave to be within bus timetable for free pass during the day10.00 preferred

Not early hate morning due to travel time to access hospitalI don't like early morning appointments that involve travelling due to traffic congestion at that time of day.Not too earlyDue to my location I'd prefer to avoid morning peak period trafficI really do not want early morning appointments

Work I work in Rutland so I tend to take leave from workI work 12.5 w shifts, so access to evening clinics closer to home would be of great benefit.work times means early appointments a mustA variety of times to make it accessible to as many people as possible with a variety of working patterns


As I work it can be difficult to get an appointment that suits me. Early mornings would be great.Out of my working day is betterWork at QMC as an RN, need early in the morning before school (for my son) or before work (for me), or in the evenings after school and work or at weekends as choiceWhen working full time, it is difficult to access during the working day. Early morning or evening would be beneficial

Late eveningTo be more flexible around working hours

Afternoon Early pm due to distance I have to travelAfternoon PreferredEarly AfternoonEarly AfternoonAfternoonAfternoons is good for me


7. Appendix 3 – thematic groupings for types of follow up appointments preferred

Making use of technology and reducing travel

Maybe facetime?

All good options! depends on hearing ability of patient and how IT savvyEmail reminder due to epilepsy causes memory lossif follow up only to arrange further appointments email or text to arrangeAnything which cuts down travel is goodThe less I have to travel/pay for parking/transport the better.

subject to purpose

Depends what the appointment is for.

Depends so would also say telephone appointmentWhichever is most appropriateDepends on the nature of the follow up. It is difficult to do follow up tests on the phone!it entirely depends upon the problem and the solution suggested. For some issues being seen face to face is essential, whereas some followup checks can be made by telephone,

Face to face Able to retube mine and my son's hearing aids but if any concerns like face-face to support any issues arisingFollow up appointments for me are to re-tube hearing aids. Or provide hearing test and new aids. Can only be done in clinic.

Cannot use email because of macula degeneration phone calls difficult to understandDepends what the issues are, came for hearing test, told too much ear wax. 1st attempt to clear immediately which was great, follow up appointments still success.

Now gap till hearing test because my diary not got gaps for a while to match available appointments.Vague choices:

Face to face would need follow up appt arranged before leaving the clinic would be my 1 st choice.

If person is deaf, "telephone" would be done via textrelay - I would have preferred it done by SMS as its quicker as textrelay


takes 4 times longer to do.

Email - its only good if deaf can read and can be responded back. Plus need to check if deaf needs an interpreter booked 1 st, to see if one is available before confirming the appt.not very good on the phonePrefer everything face to face

strongly against technology developments

Whilst computers seem set to take over almost everything I strongly feel that with health especially don’t let us forget the human touch..surely far more important than what it might lead to....Robots etc.....!!


8. Appendix 4: Anything else about your experiences you feel would help with this review?

Technology specific The latest hearing aids are not very friendly for people with dementia. Too many buttons for altering volume, etc and the batteries are very fiddly and small.More on follow up, also how to access the ‘gadgets’ that can help and link with hearing aids.Would appreciate hearing aid that picks up TV as well

Location relevant I have had a hearing assessment at Keyworth and now have to go to the Ropewalk for new aids. Appointments there are in demand and often early which becomes a problem travelling from Bingham. A local service would be beneficial.Essential that these are kept local. For me Newark Hospital. It would be very difficult to travel elsewhere.The Ropewalk is a very INCONVENIENT location. The is no public transport anywhere near, and parking is very variableAccessed audiology appointments with my mother at the Ropewalk. It’s fine but a bit out of the way and parking not always easy.The ropewalk is on a hill and as most of us are elderly it seems unsuitable.I was very happy with the assessment and service at the Audiology Centre at the Ropewalk, but it would be easier to have it more local.Move audiology down - not up that steep hill.An excellent service from the technicians, thank you.

Please could we possibly get and audio service in Bridgford as it is very expensive to get to the Ropewalk. but no complaints about he treatment at all. Thank youI am an unusual / very rare case. I find time between referral and appointment can be a bit lengthy.

That being said, last time I was at the Ropewalk I saw Richard Nicholson , who Ithink is clinical lead for audiology. He was very nice to talk to, understood the necessity of extra time spent on hearing care for me as a blind person. Some staff at the Ropewalk seem to give an impression of just going through the

motions. Understanding my needs as a blind person with regards to my hearing doesn't even enter into the equation. It can feel like a bus depot in there sometimes. Person in, person out; next next next! Please also look into the waiting roomat the ropewalk. The acoustics are terrible in there and it's not friendly for people with hearing impairments at all. I hope my data is useful.Recently seen at Newark hospital, extremely good service provided. However, in my view, ear irrigation should be provided at all GP surgeries.


Much better parking required at Ropewalk pleaseImportant to have appropriately sound isolated place for testsIf the service is somewhere you need to access by car parking can sometimes be difficult

Staff specific The staff are not deaf aware or friendly - they cannot use sign langauge or allow deaf or hard of hearing to read lips wellInitial assessment very daunting, staff not too helpful, more written resources required.It would be good if deaf BSL users have their appt with staff who knows how to use BSL as few appts I have had to lip read (if there's been changes and improvements since my last appt then that's great). It's so I don't have to wait for the interpreters to be available and be equal to hearing wait times for appts availability. It would be good if the notes states accessibility preference so the right staff can be allocated eg BSL trained or must have interpreter rather than having patients repeat requests? A pop up screen when names of patient is typed up would be useful. The same for if there's any allergies or health issues warning so the staff is made aware eg person with dementia may not remember what they are allergy to when asked again? Thanksdifferent service from different practitioners. sometimes great sometimes not, great variation in what patients are offered, when talking to other patients.

Relationship with Primary Care and system wide services

If the condition is recurrent E.g. ear suctioning give patient option to self refer for ongoing treatment if GP sanctions this option to reduce visits to surgery just for refferal each time treatment is required

I am waiting for an appointment and have been waiting since I received referral confirmation letter from my GP the last week in AugustRecently attended the Rope Walk audiology service to have a hearing test (having waiting 2 months to get an appointment) was examined and told to go to GP to get wax removed before I could get the test done. What a waste of an appointment. Audiologist said it was common, so wouldn't it be more cost effective to have a nurse on site to do was removal so my appointment/hearing test could still take place? Had to wait a further 2 weeks to see nurse at GP and then further 2 months for next appointment at ropewalk! 89 year old, prone to falls, frail and living alone - hearing level reductions not helping.Access to ear hooveringI have attended the Ropewalk only to be told I need a dewaxing before they can sort me out. The next appointment after the dewaxing is so long that I am waxed up again. Better to have the appointment very soon (same day?) as the de-waxing.It would be great if a second appointment was available as the consulted requested. For example the consultant stated that the next appointment should be 4 weeks which would have been the beginning of August.The second appointment was given for 28th


October and has been cancelled for an appointment in December. Not very goodWhy is there no annual/bi-annual review of hearing aid users? Surely you should be checked again to make sure your needs hadn't changed.

Appointments and communication

Prefer mornings - not always afternoon appointments - otherwise good.clinics currently run in my local health centre but not on days I can attend. more clinics including evenings would be great.Pop in service regarding hearing aidsLong wait for appointmentEye problems are also in the same building at the Queens but presume this is covered elsewhere?System for making appointments tends to be by letter, when email would be far more efficient. Follow up appointments tend to take some time to be confirmed by letter - wonder why they cannot be made at the time of leaving first appointment?contact needs to be more accessible either email or text as ropewalk you can email which is a bonus

Provider specific feedback - Positive

I have had to attend the ENT casualty 3 times in the last 12 months and have had an excellent service, fairly quick and efficient - eye dept.The service is very good, but I rely one someone to bring mePrevious experience at NUH was very good.my experience of the audiology service at the Ropewalk has been excellent every time - a very valuable service.I was very impressed with the audiology staff at the Ropewalk.I found the staff at the Rope Walk very professional

and efficient.Thank you for a superb service (Audiology clinic Ropewalk House)Excellent people and first rate service (Audiology clinic, Ropewalk house)From lots of experience this is a first class service (Audiology clinic ropewalk house)I have received a great service from the current setup and feel there isn't a need to changeI find Audiology Services at Ropewalk to be disability friendly and AS compatible. The audiologists there are good communicators, thoughtful, sensitive and compassionate towards anxious children with SALT needs. I did not find audiologists who assessed my child on an in patient childrens ward to be at all child-centred or AS friendly. They spoke to my young child who has SALT needs without me being present despite the fact that I was nearby. They bombarded the child with questions without representation which resulted in distress. They seemed to have little understanding of anxiety, high functioning AS, invisible disabilities and misunderstood


the child's responses.Always found a good serviceI find EENT very friendly and professional.

I access both ear/eye clinicsThe service I have received is quite alright for my needs thank you!I have just had a Cochleae Implant and had 2 operations since January 2019... My experience with ENT at QMC has been a very good one... The treatment I received was excellent and the staff couldn’t be better...Very challenging form! I am very impressed by the service at the ropewalk - helpful, friendly, always on time. Accommodating if my bus is late and in finding a convenient time for my next appointment. Very caring medical staff as well. Feel listened to and given enough time. No feeling of pressure or rush. A pleasure always to come here and see the NHS at its best.Receptionists needed to get appointment

Phone rings a long time but they are excellent!No, the appointments I've had have been on timeI was seen initially by ENT at KMH. As my problem required subspecialised care I was transferred to QMC. Luckily the surgeon does weekly clinics at KMH making it very convenient to attend OPD clinics. My surgery was performed at QMC and my care has been outstanding. Mr Kasbekar is an excellent surgeon and a credit to his profession. My anaesthetist was also amazing at QMC. Thank you.I contacted the paediatric service who advised how to get my 10 year old son seen via a GP referral as we live in Lincolnshire. The paediatric ENT staff were extremely helpful and efficient and we got an appointment much quicker than in Lincs. Excellent service.Adult audiology at Ropewalk House are brilliant .I attend regular visits to the Audio Department at Newark Hospital for hearing aid checks, great service.Ropewalk are fantastic, helpful and kind and prompt, but it is two taxis to get there and backThey saved my life, I was sent with a hearing problem and a sharp audiologist recognised some other issues and sent me for an MRI and I was diagnosed with a brain tumor. Please, please, please

don't change it.

I recently had an audiology appointment at qmc. It was fabulous- the consultant was wonderful, took the time to make sure I understood everything, even went through some apps to help with my tinnitus. Excellent service!My son was diagnosed at birth as deaf in both ears. For 3 years we were ping pinged between qmc and ropewalk. He got his hearings aids 3 days before his 3rd birthday. I feel service could be better. Once he was in the sole care of ropewalk from may this year that service improved.


Recently had experience of using ENT at Kings Mill and the service and staff have been excellenti found the vestibular doctor to be simply outstanding , he took the time to listen, the medics in ENT before i got to see him not anywhere near as muchService at the Audiology Department at the Ropewalk has always been excellent.I'd just like to say that the service at ropewalk is excellentOver the years I have found your audiology services very good. Please continue thisI was lucky as a Speech Therapist had explained who I needed to ask for so was able to get straight to that person without the triage.There is always the option to contact the service at any time. Please retain this.For those of us with impaired hearing it is essential that we do not lose any of the services currently providedThe receptionists are very good but it would be nice not to have endless queueing on the phone (Audiology Clinic, Ropewalk House)

Provider specific feedback - negative

Phoning in for appointments sometimes difficult to get through (Audiology clinic, Ropewalk House)Appointment times not within recommended timescales i.e. 3 month follow up was actually 5 months and then only at 5 days notice.Waiting times in clinics are not good. On my first appointment, I waited over an hour to see anyone after hearing test. Then I was only in with doctor 5 minutes who told me I needed further tests. I waited 4 months for that appointment too.I had a follow up meeting - consultant said 12 weeks but appt was 18 weeks then hospital cancelled it and rescheduled it in 8 weeks when I was away. I tried to change and 2as told I could only have a Tuesday at 3-20 even though I can’t do that time due to school pick up of grandchild - told that’s only day clinic runs and 3-20 is only follow up time. Very inconvenientThe service was good but the waiting time fir the first appoitment was too longThat appointments stop getting cancelled and rescheduled for 3 months later.I had to chase up and make an appointment to have a CT scan myself, which had been proposed with the hospital doctor following my audiology tests three weeks earlier. Getting through to the Scan Unit took such a long time I almost gave up trying and I don't think they had even been informed that I should receive one. It is now scheduled to take place following my perseverance.took long time for appointment despite pain resulting in an emergency appointment via doctorAn audiology technician let it slip to me that they had been told to refuse any requests made by patients until the second time of asking ie at a second appointment. This led to me being given one replacement earmould as my earmoulds had become discoloured with age and spotted with black specks but the second was deemed


good enough. When the second mould became really objectionable, they replaced it but could not match it in colour to the first replacement. When a 90 year old friend who had been a hearing aid user for some years and wore her aids all the time asked for a reassessment as her hearing had deteriorated over this period, she was refused. She then bought aids privately which is wrong for someone of her age who uses her aids all day. I worry that the NHS/NAS will lose the contract to Specsavers which is happening all round the country. Deaf people tell me that Specsavers seem to find ways of charging them for their services.It takes too long for the phones to be answered

at the rope walk site. But you already know this!!!!!The diagnosis and referral to an audiologist was very rushed. No advice given as to the future. I felt and still feel lost as to what can happen in the future. I would like some coping strategies.To save time and money it would be good if ENT would share hearing tests results recently completed (often by same staff members!) at the Rope Walk Audiology services. I have had a hearing test done at Ropewalk then within a few weeks had the same hearing test completed at ENT - waste of my time, resources, time and money.I was fitted with a hearing aid in September 2018.

Having had a consultant appointment which confirmed I would benefit from having a hearing aid I had a second appointment at QMC that just confirmed this again. The only other reason for the appointment seemed to be to pick what hearing aid I wanted. This didn't seem to be very effective use of time. I don't know if there is still this step in the pathway though.

Miscellaneous I was diagnosed with young onset of AMD but don't get any follow up except for me keeping my yearly optician appt. Is this the usual?Having difficulty hearing everything my wife says


Documents

Introduction - NHS Nottingham City€¦ · Web viewDilated Cardiomyopathy and Diabetes spinal stenosis and paralysis of legs diminishing vision and hearing wheelchair user. hearing