Carer’s Satisfaction Audit
As part of an ongoing process to monitor, update and improve the service we provide, The Rosemary Foundation sent out a questionnaire to a random sample of relatives or carers of patients to whom we had provided care for over a week and whose loved ones had ended their days at home. Questions were asked about the overall performance of staff and then breaking this down to specific areas of nurse behaviour. Page one ended with room for comments on further training requirements and suggestions for enhancing the “hands on” care.
The second page of the questionnaire asked about the administration of the Foundation; the clarity of information received and contact details together with the reliability of our ‘out of hours’ service. This closed with space for comments/suggestions on how to improve the administration of the Rosemary Foundation.
40 questionnaires where sent out in November 2009.
30 completed forms were returned which gave us a response rate of 75%, 25 of these filled in by a spouse or partner, the rest by a son/daughter. Anonymity was preserved throughout.
Summary of results
The requested information about the staff included:
Were they sensitive to patients needs? Were they reliable? Did staff provide care that was appropriate to patient’s needs? Were they easy to contact when required?
Results of questionnaire:
88% of the responses gave 10 (being excellent),
10% gave a score of 9,
1.3% scored at 8.
We did receive 1 score of 5 for “how easy was it to contact RF nurse when required”.
The questions about the administration of the service ranged from rating the information received about the foundation, clarity of contact details, who to contact when other organisations were involved (such as community or Macmillan nurse) and reliability of service when contacting RF out of hours.
Again the answers potentially could range from 1 being very poor to 10 which was excellent.
55% gave 10 as a response,
8% gave 9,
14% gave 8,
5.5% gave 7,
2.25% gave 6, and 0.75% gave a response of 4.
Several respondents gave N/A as a response to some of the questions in this section. For example if they had not had cause to contact RF out of hours they gave N/A as their answer.
This section of the form gave us considerable food for thought as some of the respondents’ answers where as low as 4. This was in response to the question about how clear the information was on whom to contact when other organisations were involved such as district or Macmillan nurses.
Conclusion
This has been a very useful process for us. Whilst the majority of respondents were more than satisfied with the nursing staff and the administration of the Rosemary Foundation there was clearly room for improvement. As a direct result of this questionnaire, we have altered the contact information on the inside cover of RF notes left with the patient in their home. Also we have now developed and produced a “Patient and Carers Guide” giving details about RF and the service they can expect to receive. (A copy of this is available on our website). We are always pleased to receive your comments where improvements can be made.
Julie Cotsell