Agenda item

Jacqui Tuffnell, Head of Commissioning at NHS Rotherham Clinical Commissioning Group (RCCG) gave the following short presentation recapping the context and proposals and showing the outcomes from the engagement with patients/families. 

Rotherham Community Health Centre

•      Rotherham Community Health Centre (RCHC) – purpose built to house the walk-in centre, GP practice, dental services and community /outpatient facilities, already includes quite a lot of therapy

•      Services have changed resulting in 2/3 of the centre now being empty – clear feedback from our population that it needs to be better utilised

What will work best for the centre and our population?

•      5 options considered - CCG worked with our estates and advisers across our community and undertook a One Estate Review as well, including the Council, RDaSH and the hospital. 

•      Recommended option to relocate Ophthalmology outpatientsenabling:

            - amalgamation of the service

            - to meet CQC requirements separating children from             adults

            - ensuring the estate is fit for purpose to meet current and future      capacity (double the floor space)

            - reducing the footfall substantially on the hospital site (by     approximately 48000 visits per year), freeing up car parking and
            increasing the footfall into Rotherham’s town centre, which should             contribute to regeneration of the town centre

            - responding to the public’s request to utilise this central, good         quality facility

Slides 4-11

Responses to questions regarding:

- Being a patient/carer

- Age/Disability

- Environment in Ophthalmology Out-patients and seating sufficiency

- Travel mode to the hospital

- Parking/Drop off at the hospital

- Ease of getting to the RCHC compared with the hospital

Headlines from the engagement

107 surveys were completed over 2 days 13-14 August in ophthalmology outpatients and B6, covering a variety of clinics. People from a wide variety of ages and backgrounds took part. The clinics were not as busy as usual, due to the time of year, in particular a number of the paediatric appointments were DNA (Did Not Attend).

Generally, most people were very supportive of the proposal, with  a substantial number who were extremely enthusiastic - 61 felt it would be easier, 22 felt it would be harder; 24 were neutral; either they felt it would be the same or were unsure. 

Main points

–     The majority of concerns were around parking

–     A small number of people noted they live close to the hospital or on a bus route/road  where they would pass the hospital, so it would be further for them

–     Several people wanted assurance that the staff would be the same

–     Even though the walk from car to unit would be shorter, some people will still need a wheelchair to be available

–     From the patients attending B6 often on a monthly basis, there was more concern and apprehension about a change of location; often with no concrete reason (i.e. ‘I like it here’); this is felt to be due to the fact that these are likely to be the most dependent patients, who have become very familiar with the current location and process

–     There were generally fairly low expectations  around the environment - ‘it’s OK as it is’  ‘ it’s a hospital isn’t it’.

–     Other concerns raised were around traffic in the town centre, waiting for appointments and in clinic, not being called in

–     Several people asked how much it would cost; so assurance that we are spending the Rotherham pound well

–     It was also noted that patients are brought to ophthalmology from other areas of the hospital – those mentioned were neuro and the Urgent and Emergency Care Centre (UECC). It was queried how this would work if the department was to move, how often this is needed, and what the impact could be on appointments if staff are called to TRFT site, or the implications for moving patients round the site. 

Supporting the change

•      Parking – there is some on-site parking at RCHC and a drop off zone will be created, there are a number of car parks in a short walking distance

•      Urgent patients from other areas – a small ‘urgent’ service will continue at TRFT connected to the staff who will be providing surgery

•      Rotherham pound – the department is in need of an upgrade particularly to split paediatrics from adult services and insufficient space currently therefore investment is required whether this is at the hospital or RCHC

•      Long term attenders – consideration of the impact of the change for this group – support and assurance

Next steps

•      Incorporate the findings from the engagement into the business proposal

•      Business proposal to Governing body and Hospital Trust Board in September or October

•      If approved, building work to commence in the autumn and service to move by next April

Angela Wood, Chief Nurse at TRFT viewed the proposals as a positive opportunity for the Trust to make sure the ophthalmology services were the best they could possibly be and in the right environment.  Staff had been heavily involved in looking at the site and ensuring it would be fit for purpose.  She had visited with the Board, non-executive Directors and other colleagues and talked to the teams about the proposal and how that would impact on the extra outcomes they could give to the patients.

The following issues were raised and discussed:-

·         Following on from the concerns raised above, will the proposals cover if patients had to go to ophthalmology from neuro or from the Urgent and Emergency Care Centre?

- Urgent patients have been planned for and would not have to transfer down to the health centre.   It was the day-to-day activity in the unit with patients who were programmed and planned to have an appointment who would go to the Community Health Centre, not the urgent service. 

·         Had there been any progress on arrangements for pharmacy provision?

- Nothing definite had been agreed but it formed part of the case for TRFT.  Pharmacy was currently provided from up at the hospital and it was a question of whether or not an element of that service would transfer in situ.  Patients would not be required to go to the hospital to collect their pharmacy products.

Members noted the information provided and were supportive of the proposals following the public engagement. 

Jacqui was thanked by the Chair for her presentations.

Resolved:-

1)    That a further report be provided in 2020 once the changes to the ophthalmology outpatient service had been implemented to evaluate the impact of the changes.