Agenda and minutes

Apologies had been received from Ms P Agar, Mr T Baker, Mr C Bloore, Mr P Grove, Prof J W Raine and Mr A Stafford.

None.

Members of the public wishing to take part should notify the Head of Legal and Democratic Services in writing or by email indicating the nature and content of their proposed participation no later than 9.00am on the working day before the meeting (in this case 8 April 2019). Enquiries can be made through the telephone number/email address below.

None.

Previously circulated

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 5 March 2019 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Attending for this Item from Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust (WAHT) were:

Matthew Hopkins, Chief Executive

Jackie Edwards, Deputy Chief Nursing Officer (Quality)

The Chairman welcomed the Chief Executive to his first HOSC and in turn the Chief Executive introduced himself by reporting that he had been in post since 14 January 2019 and was looking forward to working with partners to improve the quality of acute health services for the residents of Worcestershire.

By way of presentation, the Committee was reminded that since the last WAHT report on 26 November 2018, there had been no Trust wide Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection and therefore overall ratings remained unchanged.  However, department reports were available following unannounced CQC visits.  All inspection reports were available on the CQC website -  www.cqc.org.uk

The Trust’s Quality Improvement Strategy (QIS), which was launched in June 2018, and discussed at the November HOSC, was driving improvement through the Divisional, Directorate and Ward Quality Improvement Plans, such as the Patient Safety Plan, the Clinical Effectiveness Plan and the Patient, Carer and Community Engagement Plan.  This was the first time there had been a Trust-wide review and Strategy.

It was reported that engagement had been undertaken to understand what patients thought quality meant, with 99% of respondents feeling that they had ‘good care’, which was defined as being treated with dignity and determining what was wrong, in order to provide a remedy.  In addition, the majority of respondents felt they received ‘safe care’ with visible improvements.  External feedback, from surveys and online resources, was also cited, with positive patient experiences referred to.  These overall positive reactions were not in line with the reported preconceived expectations of the Trust.  Many had reported they were expecting a poor experience of care depending on their destination hospital, and these expectations had generally been framed from negative reports in the local media.

Patient experience was now gathered in real time and, if possible, suggestions for change were implemented.  One example was given, where snacks had been made available, in response to patient feedback.

The Trust acknowledged that in the past, external feedback such as on the NHS website, had not always been responded to in a timely manner.  However, now it was read on a daily basis and actioned accordingly.

Internal monitoring was focussed on quality audits, listening in to handovers, safety walkabouts and experiencing life on the floor; where senior leaders worked alongside front line teams on a weekly basis.  This latter element was now embedded as routine and Leaders and Staff welcomed the approach.

Although there had been no change to the overall Trust CQC Ratings since February 2018, there had been a cultural shift since the introduction of the Trust’s 4ward behaviours change programme, where one of the four pillars was ‘work together, celebrate together’ and recognition had been received for the Meadow Birthing Unit and an award from the Nursing Times. 

A Trust wide accreditation programme (Path to Platinum) had been launched, which would enable wards, departments and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 918.

Members present had nothing to note at this time.

The Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager reminded the Committee that it was a consultee for health bodies’ draft Quality Accounts.  It was noted that the timescale for submission of comments was fixed, yet publication dates varied.  The Committee agreed that when received by Officers, the draft Quality Accounts would be circulated electronically to Members for any comment.  

The Committee agreed that there was nothing to add to the Work Programme at this time, however, in response to a query about Audiology, it was clarified that this Item was on the Work Programme and would be scheduled for later in the year.

In relation to the ongoing Issue for Scrutiny on the STP, the Chairman asked Officers to establish with NHSE the extent of planning responses submitted by them as a consultee.