Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
LONDON SEXUAL HEALTH TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME SERVICE USER ENGAGEMENT Esther Dickie, Knowledge and Information Officer Camden and Islington Public Health LONDON SEXUAL HEALTH TRANSFORMATION PROGRAMME Partnership of 29 boroughs to deliver a new joint commissioning model for open access sexual health services across much of the capital. Includes Genito-Urinary Medicine (GUM) and Sexual and Reproductive Health (SRH) services. Aim is to lead the transformation of services to deliver improved and cost effective public health outcomes, meet the increasing demand and deliver better value. 2 Engagement aims Second wave of service user engagement to inform programme, to gain greater insight into: What matters to residents and service users in receiving good quality sexual health services The opportunities and challenges in increasing use of online GUM services The opportunities and challenges in providing integrated GUM and SRH services versus separated services. Effective methods in promoting information and service choice. 3 Methodology Online survey • 2,200 responses 1,610 were London residents and sexual health service users Waiting room survey • Responses from 376 GUM and SRH service users across four services in Camden and Islington Focus groups • 11 focus groups with 98 participants from Camden and Islington 4 Key findings Strong support for integrated GUM and SRH services – 67% online survey respondents from London said they would prefer integrated over separate services or had no preference – Women, 18-24 year olds and heterosexual respondents had a higher preference for integrated contraceptive and sexual health testing services – Convenience of service being under one roof – Suggestion for women only sessions 5 Key findings (cont) Online testing – 51% of online respondents would consider using self-sample kits at home, and a further 27% were undecided – More interest in using self sample among women than men, and among heterosexual respondents than gay or lesbian respondents. – Some concerns around: Postal delivery (time delay and confidentiality concerns) Accuracy (including a lack of confidence in correctly administering the test) Immediate post-diagnosis support 6 What matters to service users? Ease of accessing service – Being able to book appointments online or walk in Waiting times – Increased availability of early morning and early evening appointments Welcoming reception areas Fast access to test results – Requests for same day, self-sample booths suggested to speed up the process. Confidentiality: – Privacy around reception areas Attitudes and expertise of staff: – Non-judgemental – Skills in facilitating open discussion around sexual practices 7 What worked well? Good response rate to online survey – Notices on electronic screens in waiting room areas – Flyers – Twitter Waiting room approach, able to get good number of responses is short amount of time Focus group insights, added real depth to survey findings 8 Key challenges and lessons learned Breakdown of online survey responses of London residents by region, 2016 Focus group recruitment – Particularly men, and some 5% (74) BAME groups 12% (195) – Lead in time required to 33% engage local VCS (526) NCL organisations to support NEL 14% NWL Inner recruitment (225) NWL Outer Number of survey answer options SEL SWL – Small when broken down by Other London demographic factors 12% 15% Response rates at borough/sub(189) (244) 10% region level (157) Source: Pan London Online Sexual Health Survey 2016 9 Questions? [email protected] 10