· Web viewAlso introduction of citrate urine bottles (illegible word) created additional...

Barnsley & Rotherham Integrated Laboratory services Department: Pan PathologyFilename : document.docx QMS No : DOC 329

Community User Survey 2018 Report

Pathology would like to express their thanks to all those who were able to complete this year’s survey.

INTRODUCTIONISO Standards sub-clause 4.14.3 set requirements that the laboratory management shall seek information relating to user perception as to whether the service has met the needs and requirements of its users. This survey has been performed to comply with these standards, and in doing so, will bring to the attention of the laboratory management any areas of services provided by the laboratory that require improvement.

The user satisfaction survey ran between 23rd March to 20th April 2018 and its purpose is to obtain feedback from our users on the quality of the services provided by the laboratory.

The information gained from this survey will enable laboratory management to look at the service we provide and decide how to improve it to meet the needs and requirements of our users, as part of our commitment to continually improve quality.

METHODThe satisfaction survey was carried out using a questionnaire which was developed in consultation with BRILS Management Team, Clinical Heads of Department and the Laboratory Director, and comprised of 18 questions designed to elicit users’ general views on the quality of the services provided by Pathology. The respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction using the following response options: Yes or No, except in the case of questions relating to advice and assistance provided by pathology staff, where the response options were: Does not meet my needs, acceptable and excellent. Dissatisfaction was derived from the option ‘Does not meet my needs’ whilst satisfaction was derived from the levels ‘acceptable’, and ‘excellent’. A percentage distribution of responses was used to present the data and cumulative percentage dissatisfaction compared to cumulative percentage satisfaction. The respondents were also instructed to use ‘not applicable’ where appropriate. All questions asked were mandatory, except for question 2 & 3 which may leave the respondent identifiable. The final question asks users to provide any comments to improve the service. These have been collated and have been discussed at a feedback session to the BRILS Management Team and actions identified where appropriate. Responses are detailed at the end of the report. All responses received are duplications of the text received.

Separate user surveys have been completed for Hospital Users (Barnsley - DOC 135, Rotherham – DOC 330), Phlebotomy (DOC 331), and Funeral Directors (DOC 333).

Questionnaires were sent via survey monkey to GP mailing lists, midwifes, sexual health clinics and hospices. Paper copies were also sent out with the sample couriers to all sample collection points.

Version : 2018 of 30Author : Natalie Holmes Approved by : Heather Da CostaActive Date : 14/06/2018 Review due : 14/06/2019


RESULTS OF SURVEYQuestion 1: Staff Group

A total of 49 responses were received from users within the Community, these are broken down in to Medical, Nursing, Allied Health Professionals, Community Nursing, GP, Midwife, Spectrum/GUM (Sexual Health) and Mental Health Professionals. Of the nine respondents who answered “Other”, their responses were: practice nurse, Dr. Receptionist, HCA, Hospice Senior Manager, Hospice Nursing, Community Midwifery, Administrator General Practice and two participants didn’t state their staff group. This was a much higher number of responses than 2017 (27 responses) and covered a wider variety of staff.



Question 2: Name (Optional)

This question was optional and was included to allow for specific personal feedback to be given where relevant and to enable the incentive of a box of chocolate to be delivered to the winning participant in the draw. For the purpose of confidentiality, the names of participants will not be included in this report. 22 respondents gave their name, whilst 27 respondents opted to submit their response anonymously.

Question 3: Location (Optional)

Location Number of ParticipantsCrown Street Surgery 1Blyth Road Maltby 1WISH 2Goldthorpe Medical Centre 1Morthern Road, Wickersley 2Magna, Dalton 1Whiston Medical Centre 1Penistone Group Practice 3Treeton MC 1The Cudworth Centre 1BISH 2Brierley Medical Centre 1Hospice 1Lundwood H/C 1Hoyland Medical Practice 1Dove Valley Practice 1Wombwell Medical Centre 1Walderslade Surgery 1Community 5Barnsley (no specific location) 3Rotherham 2

33 respondents chose to include the department in which they worked, whilst 17 respondents chose to submit their survey anonymously. The above table shows that responses were received from a wide variety of clinical areas within the community, covering GP practices, hospice and sexual health clinics.



Question 4: Are you satisfied with the usefulness of the Pathology Website as a source of information for each laboratory?

A substantial amount of users, 44.90%-77.55%, stated that they were not aware that there was a Pathology website. Given this response, the Pathology Department will begin to promote the website in collaboration with the hospital digital communications team. 2.04% of users stated that they were not satisfied with the Pathology website across all disciplines. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.

Previous user surveys have only questions if the users feel that the website is acceptable or not, and have not addressed the awareness regarding the availability of the Pathology website. Enabling users to leave this responses has highlighted the need for promotion of the website.



Comment ResponseNot seen/used. Given the lack of awareness regarding the

Pathology Website as a source of information, the Pathology Department will begin to promote the website in collaboration with the hospital digital communications team (QIN 365).

The Pathology Website is available via the following link: http://www.barnsleyhospital.nhs.uk/pathology/

Do you mean ICE screen? Not sure about website if not this.I just don't access it as not in clinical practice anymore.Don;t use the blood transfusion service

Question 5:

Are you satisfied with the range of investigations provided by the laboratory?

100% of respondents were satisfied with the range of investigations provided by the laboratory in Blood Transfusion and Cellular Pathology. In Blood Sciences and Microbiology, 95.56% of respondents were satisfied, however 4.44% were not. In 2017, all users were satisfied with the range of investigations in Blood Transfusion and Microbiology but 3.70% of users were not satisfied with Blood Sciences and Histopathology. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.

Comment ResponseVersion : 2018 of 30Author : Natalie Holmes Approved by : Heather Da CostaActive Date : 14/06/2018 Review due : 14/06/2019

http://www.barnsleyhospital.nhs.uk/pathology/


Some of the swab options could be removed/simplified. Need access to ELF screening + FIT testing as per NICE.

When requesting swab tests, the site of the swab is essential for appropriate sample processing. The Microbiology department is currently in the process of updating ICE to simplify the requesting process. Genital and STI sample requesting has already been updated.

ELF screening is available but only for certain consultants. This test is expensive and therefore a business case would be required if this test is required by other people. Since NHSI has designated hubs to perform the FIT test, a request to perform this at BRILS would need to be raised officially via the CCG.

This is merely because you have to outsource confirmation tests.

Unfortunately, some tests have to be referred to other laboratories as, due to the nature of the test, they are unable to be performed in house. Please be ensured that all of the laboratories to which we refer tests are evaluated periodically to ensure that they are suitable and provide a high quality of testing.



Question 6: Are you satisfied with the courier transport used to transport specimens to the laboratory?

93.88%-100% of respondents were satisfied with the courier transport used for transporting specimens to the laboratory 5.00%-6.12% were not satisfied. This is a decrease from 2017, where all users were satisfied with the courier transport system. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.



Comment ResponseCourier Collection Time Impacting Patient Results

2pm pick up INR U&E -> lab 5pm -> processed and rang to GP practice at 6.20pm. In multiple decisions just as we are about to shut or passed to call. Doesn't make (illegible word) and not safe. Last pick up 2pm ->lab 5.30 -> ring practice 6.20 for high INRS/K+ has curved multiple times. It seems unconceivable that (illegible word) would (illegible word) set up a service line in that (illegible word).

We are currently auditing this as a department to highlight where we can try to improve transport.

Still spend a huge amount of time + effort dealing with factitious abnormal potassium results. Also introduction of citrate urine bottles (illegible word) created additional specimen handling issues. Rationale for this change has not been properly communicated.

We are currently auditing the courier transport to highlight where we can try to improve in order to reduce issues with results due to time delay as a result of time taken for transportation.

In response to the introduction of citrate urine bottles, the laboratory is not aware of this; however, there has been a recent introduction of boric acid universals for urine microscopy and culture. The presence of boric acid helps to maintain the microbiological quality of the specimen, it prevents cell degradation and overgrowth of organisms that can occur if the sample is not analysed within 4 hours of collection. Boric acid preservative holds the bacterial population steady for 48–96 hours, and other cellular components remain intact. Using these containers will mean a better quality of result for those samples that cannot be transported to the laboratory on day of collection.

Requests for Different Collection TimesSometimes comes too early so have to rush / collection van has to wait Otherwise fine I think


It would be helpful to have a collection at our branch surgery at Baurgh Green.

Would like a later collection time.



Question 7: Are you satisfied with the format/layout of the test request form for handwritten non-electronic requests?

94.29%-100% of users were satisfied with the format/layout of the handwritten request forms. These results are very similar to the previous year. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.



Comment ResponseDon't use unless forced as not easy to understand. Where possible, we encourage the use of ICE

requesting, however, in some circumstances it may be necessary for handwritten requests to be completed e.g. ICE downtime, ICE not available in clinic. The handwritten request forms have recently been reviewed and amended to improve clarity about the information Pathology require to ensure the correct result is delivered to the clinician looking after the patient.

Could be a little more compact - requests are spread out.don't use it, all requested via ICEalthough difficult to hand write on specimens and time consuming

Need too much information to be included When designing the request form, we try to ensure that only essential information is collected. It is essential that we have appropriate patient identifiable information to ensure that the results are linked to the correct patient record. It is also essential to know which clinician and location the results should be sent back to, both for data protection and to ensure a high quality service. Appropriate clinical details are also essential as they may influence how the test is processed/interpreted.

Despite circling yes when fasting test is required often it is inputted as random. When questioned been told that need to also highlight the blood test as fasting as "reception staff just look at the tests that need doing and don't look at anything else"!! Also area for GP/Consultant is unclear- i.e should it be the one who the results go to or the one who is requesting the test as sometimes in our nurse clinic they are different. Needs to clearly say what information it is that is required. Also if new address is put on the blood request form, it is not changed on the labs electronic system

We will remind staff to record this information as appropriate. It would be helpful to know of specific instances to improve our processes as appropriate. Please feel free to contact us to discuss further.

The handwritten request forms have recently been reviewed and amended to improve clarity about the information Pathology require to ensure the correct result is delivered to the clinician looking after the patient. The GP/Consultant should be the person who you require the results to go to.

Question 8: Do you use electronic requesting?



87.23% users use electronic requesting via ICE for Blood Sciences and Microbiology. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below. This question has not been asked in previous surveys.

Comment ResponseNo access to ICE. We are working to try and resolve ICE access issues

for community users, as we understand it can be frustrating and cause extra work without having a hospital system available.

No access in communityWe use electronic requesting when we are sending bloods from the hospital. Some GP surgeries will give access to their electronic requesting but most don't, or the midwives don't know how to do it from the GP systems due to lack of training. We are unable to print from our own laptops and connectivity is sometimes poor.in some clinics access to ICE online at the GP is not available therefore I have to rely on handwritten requests.Didn’t know it existed and/or how to do it ICE training is available from the hospital Clinical

Systems department.



Question 9: Are you satisfied with ICE when requesting laboratory tests?

91.11% of Blood Sciences Users and 95.56% of Microbiology Users are satisfied with electronic requesting via ICE. Slightly fewer users are satisfied with ICE for requesting laboratory testing than in 2017. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.



Comment ResponseDoes run slow sometimes. New hardware for Barnsley and Rotherham should

improve performance, looking at software version upgrades as well to improve stability and functionality

Limit of 10 tests when some agreed protocols actually require more e.g. new vague symptoms pathway + current presets are of debatable use.

Thanks for your feedback; as a result of this response we have increased the available limit to 20, as our new laboratory system is able to handle more orders. If you would like to suggest/discuss new requesting panels on ICE please get in touch by emailing [email protected] and the Pathology IT team will get in touch

We request via S1 and the tests are sometimes not easy to find - needs review but this should be in progress

If you have suggestions for improving the layout of requesting panels in ICE please contact us on [email protected] and we can look at amending the existing pages, or passing on some helpful information to make searching for the correct test more simple.

I don't use it but I know my colleagues do have issues with it. Such as HIV results coming in to Spectrum System one

We apologise for the disruption this caused to your service, it was the result of an error on behalf of our suppliers in implementing a new interface for reporting results, and they were extremely slow in investigating and rectifying. It has since been resolved, and complaints were made to the company regarding their handling of the issue.

slightly frustrating that can only request max 10 tests - there are occasions when you need to request more - surely this could be changed??!

Thanks for your feedback; as a result of this response we have increased the available limit to 20, as our new laboratory system is able to handle more orders.

Apart from patient information not up to date despite latest information being written on request form

ICE receives patient demographic information from the NHS Spine as the master record; please ensure you’ve updated a Spine-linked system to fully update patient demographic lists to apply the change to our downstream systems.

When a request form is printed and collect now* is ticked, (sometimes accidentally instead of postponed), if the form is reprinted at a later date - the original date and time of the printed form is on the form. This has lead to samples being thrown away as they say the incorrect date and time even though they were valid samples

This is the correct functionality for ICE, we apologise for any inconvenience it causes but this cannot be amended. If an event has been “collected” instead of “postponed” we would advise repeating the request correctly, then email [email protected] with the details of the incorrect request, and we will get it deleted. Otherwise, crossing out and correcting the date on the form would be sufficient.

There is a recurrent problem that we have reported repeatedly and it hasn't been sorted and poses a

This issue can be resolved by adding the ICE URL to the list of compatibility view sites in Internet


mailto:[email protected]





clinical risk. If you order tests that need more than one form it wont print the second form and an error message comes up saying 'do you want to keep running scrips?' It then wont let you go back into ICE and request the test that hasn't printed. You have to go out of the patient record and back in and request again so it looks like you have requested twice.

Explorer. Please contact us on [email protected] and we’ll be happy to provide instructions on how to rectify this

Question 10: Are you satisfied with ICE when reviewing laboratory results?

100% of Blood Transfusion and Histopathology users and 92.86% of Blood Sciences and Microbiology users were satisfied with ICE when viewing results. In 2017, all users were satisfied, however, this decrease is to be expected given a recent LIMS system upgrade and ICE system upgrade leading to recent IT difficulties. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.





Comment ResponseNo access to ICE. We are working to try and resolve ICE access issues

for community users, as we understand it can be frustrating and cause extra work without having a hospital system available.

I find it frustrating that results for one patient might be interspersed with another’s as they appear in the inbox.

Could you please provide some examples to [email protected] and we can look in to the underlying cause of this problem?

For the most part ok Main issue is that for some of our patients we request under g number. There are repeated occasions when these are entered incorrectly and we have to search under date of birth - that then means going through several pt records which is time consuming and dangerous as records don't link up - thus results may be missed. Also g number tests are often reported to S1 - they should all just be on ICE. We have contacted the labs about this on several occasions. Recently I have noticed that the most recent results don't link up with earlier results when I double click to view previous values.

Patients with multiple G numbers on ICE can be merged by us, please email the G number to [email protected] and we will merge the disparate records. The issue where significant amounts of G numbers were going to S1 instead of just ICE should now have been rectified; there will continue to be some issues with this but a bug which caused a large amount of the problems has been fixed.

However, very recently we have some problems with reporting of our results. This has caused some difficulties in clinic.

We apologise for the disruption this caused to your service, it was the result of an error on behalf of our suppliers in implementing a new interface for reporting results, and they were extremely slow in investigating and rectifying. It has since been resolved, and complaints were made to the company regarding their handling of the issue.

I don’t use it Thank you for your response, we hope that if you do use ICE for reviewing results in the future, that you are satisfied with the service.

Very slow when deputising. Is it possible to file normal bloods in a group filing?

On-going ICE filing project at BDG to improve the filing experience and help users move to a paperless system. We’re looking at the current ICE functionality and how we can streamline the filing process going forward. Keep up with the project through the updates on the intranet homepage.

Question 11: Are you satisfied with the usefulness and availability of advice and assistance provided by laboratory staff in normal working hours?







94.12% - 95.66% of users were satisfied with the usefulness and availbility of advice and assistance from laboratory staff in normal working hours, where acceptable and excellent responses denote satisfaction. In all disciplines, over half of users felt that the usefulness and availability of advice was excellent. 4.17% - 5.88% of users felt that this did not meet their needs. All departments received significantly increased “excellent” scores compared to 2017. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.

Comment ResponseCompliments



Staff always very helpful Thank you for your feedback and understanding that Pathology can be a busy place for staff to work. The positive results have been fed back to Laboratory Managers to feed back to staff as part of staff meetings. The results have also been passed onto the Pathology Business and Service manager for inclusion in Staff Briefings. Compliments relating to individual staff members have been fed back to the individual.

Yes, my contacts in the lab, namely <staff member name> is always responsive and helpful when I email her. She is an amenable person and I enjoy meeting with her to discuss contract issues.Aware of how busy they are.

Areas for ImprovementMicro technicians don't seem to have ability to offer much advice - all goes to cons.

The Microbiology BMS and BMA staff is not qualified to give clinical advice. They are able to advise upon technical queries

Generally staff seem to not clearly understand how our results are managed in the labs. However, some staff members are extremely helpful - <staff member name> has recently resolved a few issues very promptly.

If there are occasions where staff do not understand how the results are managed in the lab, please contact the laboratory.

Thank you for your compliment. This has been fed back to the individual staff member.

Sometimes information that doesn't make sense i.e when a fasting blood test is required, and the Y/N is highlighted, being told that reception staff don't read this so need to highlight it as well therefore what is the point in having it there as an option if not acted upon

We will remind staff to record this information as appropriate. It would be helpful to know of specific instances to improve our processes as appropriate. Please feel free to contact us to discuss further.



Question 12: Are you satisfied with the usefulness and availability of advice and assistance provided by laboratory staff out of hours?

94.12% - 100% of users were satisfied with the usefulness and availbility of advice and assistance from laboratory staff out of normal working hours, where acceptable and excellent responses denote satisfaction. In all disciplines, over half of users felt that the usefulness and availability of advice was excellent. 5.88% of users felt that this did not meet their needs in Blood Sciences of Microbiology. All departments received significantly increased “excellent” scores compared to 2017. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below



Comment Responsei am unsure of your working hours and what is classed as out of hours

Routine working hours for the departments can be accessed via the Pathology Website and the Intranet and are:

Blood Sciences and Blood Transfusion: A full service is available Monday to Friday 08.45 am

to 8.00 pm The out-of-hours service is staffed by one BMS from

each discipline and requests made during this period should be limited to those investigations which will have an impact on immediate patient management.

Work is prioritised by laboratory staff into:1. Urgent Requests – All Emergency Department

requests and requests where the urgent protocol has been followed.

2. ASAP Requests – Samples from predefined areas where turnaround times are key to patient care.

3. Routine Requests

Cellular Pathology: A full cellular pathology service is available Monday –

Thursday 8.00am – 17.00pm, Friday 08.00am – 16:45pm, Saturday 9.00am – 12.00pm.

Mortuary routine opening hours are Monday – Thursday 8.00am – 16.00pm, Friday 8.00am – 15.30pm.

At weekends, Bank Holidays and at all other times, the Mortuary Technician on call may be contacted via the Hospital Duty Manager via switchboard/Bleep 219.

Microbiology: A full service is available Monday to Friday 8.30 am to

8.00 pm. There is a limited service for essential work only on

Saturday/Sunday 9.00 am to 5.00 pm. At all other times urgent analyses are provided by an

emergency out-of-hours on-call service staffed by one Biomedical Scientist (BMS) contactable via switchboard.



Question 13: Are you satisfied with the usefulness and availability of advice from clinicians in normal working hours?

All users were satisfied with the usefulness and availbility of advice and assistance from clinical staff in normal working hours, where acceptable and excellent responses denote satisfaction. In all disciplines, over half of users felt that the usefulness and availability of advice was excellent. All departments received significantly increased “excellent” scores compared to 2017. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.



Comment ResponseOften delays getting cons micro advice. Thank you for response to the above question. We

are very sorry to hear that you find difficult to get hold of a microbiologist. We try and answer the calls as much as possible. However when one microbiologist is on leave or busy with meetings the other microbiologist may find it hard to answer all the calls, as we have only two microbiologists on site and no junior support. If you leave a message with the laboratory to staff to call you back as soon as possibleThe on-call service, which extends from 5:00 PM to 9:00 AM the next day, and for the full 24 hours on weekends and public holidays done by a Consultant microbiology as the only 1 on, is increasingly becoming very onerous which in many occasions is jeopardising our clinical duties during the day time. As you know we have no junior medical microbiologist colleagues and the calls come straight to the Consultant Microbiologists.We have found that a significant number of calls made between 11:00 PM and 7:00 AM are inappropriate and being made by junior colleagues. Examples include the following: Inadequate clinical review before the call is

made, with it appearing that the junior doctor is a go between the Consultant and Microbiologist.

Ineffective hand-over amongst clinical teams so that the medical team taking over is not aware of advice already given by Microbiologists earlier (mainly due to lack of documentation).

Not following the principles of SBAR when seeking for on-call microbiology advice, often making a second call necessary when full details have been acquired.

Requesting antibiotic codes when this is not necessary during on-call hours as the policy allows use of restricted antimicrobials for 24 hours initially if required.

The purpose of the call being defensive, i.e. double checking with the Microbiologist just in case.

We think in the setting of ITU call registrar is off good quality and will let the switch board allow calls from them

As you know all the Microbiologists are dedicated

Sometimes time consuming to get through.

Consultant Microbiologist difficult to contact.



clinicians and more than happy to provide clinical advice and assist in any way they can. However, the increasing volume of calls needs to be addressed, as we cannot sustain the current demand.We thank you for your patience and glad to hear that you are satisfied with the advice and service you receive when you speak to the Microbiology Consultants.

Don't use Thank you for you feedback. We hope that if you need advice in the future that you are satisfied with our service.

it wouldn’t be my job to contact them but i haven’t heard any problems from our consultants

Not used this service



Question 14: Are you satisfied with the usefulness and availability of advice from clinicians out of hours?

All users were satisfied with the usefulness and availbility of advice and assistance from clinical staff out of normal working hours, where acceptable and excellent responses denote satisfaction. All departments received significantly increased “excellent” scores compared to 2017. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.

Comment ResponseDon't use Thank you for your feedback. We hope that if you

need advice from clinicians out of hours in the future, that you find our service satisfactory.



Question 15: Are you satisfied with the report turnaround times?

100% of users were satisfied with the report turnaround times in Blood Sciences, Histopathology and Microbiology. 5.56% were not satisfied with the turnaround times for Blood Sciences reports, which is a decrease on the previous survey. This is a decrease on the 2017 user survey, where all users were satisfied with the report turn around tomes for all disciplines. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.

Comment ResponseMostly very Good , However problems recently led to patient having delayed results

We have KPIs for turn-around times all of the tests we offer and locations requests are received from and we monitor these KPIs. Please note that some tests do take longer than others due to the nature of testing processes. Please phone the laboratory if you wish discuss further.

being quicker would be helpful



Question 16: Are you satisfied with the report content, clairty and interpretive comments?

94.44% - 100% of users were satisfied with the report content, clairty and interpretive comments. These results are similar to the results of the 2017 user survey. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.



Comment Responsefor the most part - the report for abnormal haematology results is often very useful and helps decide how to manage patients

Thank you. The positive results have been fed back to Laboratory Managers to feed back to staff as part of staff meetings. The results have also been passed onto the Pathology Business and Service manager for inclusion in Staff Briefings. Compliments relating to individual staff members have been fed back to the individual.

Sometimes a little sparse and confusing. Please contact the laboratory with specific examples, to enable us to amend reports as appropriate.

ranges for some tests are not always written at the side of the resultThere has been an increase in the 'blurb' that accompanies results e.g. saying about N-acetylcystine affecting U&E. This is irrelevant to GP, we wont be giving anyone N-acetylecystine. Is there a way of distinguishing GP requests and not adding all the blurb?

The laboratory has an obligation to inform our users about potential results interpretation problems – e.g. interference due to some medication. Currently, we inform users by automated comments which accompany the results. However, we are currently reviewing method by which we inform our users.



Question 17: If you currently receive paper test reports, would turning off paper reports impact on your department?

This question was designed in order to gain an insight into the viability of ending the issuing of paper reports in favour of electronic reporting. It was found that 57.14% - 73.33% of users did not feel that ending paper reporting would impact upon their department. Where associated comments were left, responses are detailed in the table below.



Comment ResponsePositive Impact of Turning Off Paper Reports

Don't get paper report. Thank you for your feedback. This question was designed in order to gain an insight into the viability of ending the issuing of paper reports in favour of electronic reporting. It is encouraging to know that you are using and are satisfied with electronic reporting, and this helps to reduce the amount of paper used within the Trust.

Don't receive them.I have all results via ICE. I no longer use paper reports

Negative Impact of Turning Off Paper ReportsSome tests yes. We keep all patients records on paper & computer.

Thank you for your feedback. This question was designed in order to gain an insight into the viability of ending the issuing of paper reports in favour of electronic reporting. It is useful for Pathology to know how the paper reports we send out are used.

Only if there was an issue with them coming in to S1So long as we can print of the ones we want.Unsure as it is the medics that read these and we, as nurses, request the tests.



USER FEEDBACK AND SUGGESTIONS

Users were asked to provide feedback or suggestions to improve the service. Each of the comments have been split into categories in the below table to allow appropriate action to be taken.

Comment Number

Comment Response

Compliment1 I think it is great and really appreciate the

service you provide ThanksThank you. The positive results have been fed back to Laboratory Managers to feed back to staff as part of staff meetings. The results have also been passed onto the Pathology Business and Service manager for inclusion in Staff Briefings. Compliments relating to individual staff members have been fed back to the individual.

2 Only as above. I think you provide a great service, thank you.

3 Overall you provide a great service. There when needed. Thank you.

4 Great service. cheers5 Hi We have always found the labs to be

helpful. The IT upgrade was found to be a little difficult for General practice but we were assured that the IT dep. would sort this and they did, so thanks to Cameron and the team supporting him. Jane

IT6 I feel that access to ICE would improve my

practice.Please get in touch with us on [email protected] and we would be happy to help you get access to ICE for your surgery.

7 For some reason blood tests are being downloaded into our practice inbox which have been requested by hospital clinicians. I contacted one of the consultants to find out why this was happening and he was unaware so I presume this is some sort of default setting (??) - this creates extra work for us GPs + is a patient safety risk issue as we may just hospital docs have sorted out abnormal results and they might assume we have sorted stuff out when in reality neither part has! Please have a look at this.

GP Users have the ability to download copies of hospital reports into their practice system using the GP download feature. This process is manual, and should only happen when a GP specifically downloads the result. If you believe you are receiving incorrect records, please email the information to [email protected] and we will investigate further.

8 What back ups are in place for computer failure? Results do not go back to requestor on ICE.

This is being considered as part of the on-going ICE filing project, please see the updates on the hospital intranet pages and in the Hospital Buzz for information about where we are with the project, and what we hope to achieve. Any suggestions are welcome, please email [email protected] and we’ll get back in touch.

9 Change it back so that the reprinted forms have the date and time of the reprinted ICE form, not the reprinted one

We are unsure about what your comment is refers to. Please contact Pathology IT on [email protected] to discuss further.









Comment Number

Comment Response

Sample Collection/Transport10 Service generally very good but we still need a

better transport solution for handling U&Es, what happened to the proposed "orange top" bottles? (Illegible word) to me two urine pots now for dipstick then MSU increase staff costs, container waste + (illegible word) risk contamination, what evidence is there to indicate this imposition was necessary?


There has been a recent introduction of boric acid universals for urine microscopy and culture. The presence of boric acid helps to maintain the microbiological quality of the specimen, it prevents cell degradation and overgrowth of organisms that can occur if the sample is not analysed within 4 hours of collection. Boric acid preservative holds the bacterial population steady for 48–96 hours, and other cellular components remain intact. Using these containers will mean a better quality of result for those samples that cannot be transported to the laboratory on day of collection.

Turnaround Times11 Recent problems re delay /reporting of patient

test results, did cause some distress for patients and staff. Hopefully soon resolved However staff always helpful when contacted for advice.

The recent implementation of a new laboratory computer system has caused delays in reporting, we apologise for this and all issues should now be resolved.

Thank you for your compliment.12 The lab reports for cross matching and

transfusions seems to arrive quite a few days after the patient has received. im not sure why this is.

Paper transfusion reports are a finalised record which was historically printed and sent to the requesting area upon completion of all serological testing (please note this can take up to 7 days in the event of referred samples). We acknowledge that often this is received in retrospect by areas outside of the hospital. Since the Laboratory computer system upgrade in Feb 2018 – paper reports have been turned off as all reports are now available using the ICE platform. Should you wish to discuss further please do not hesitate to contact the Laboratory Manager.


· Web viewAlso introduction of citrate urine bottles (illegible word) created additional...

Documents

Transcript of · Web viewAlso introduction of citrate urine bottles (illegible word) created additional...