Customer Satisfaction Report New Forest Physiotherapy Clinic 2014
Patient Satisfaction Survey Breakdown
This is the break down and analysis of the results gathered from the New Forest Physiotherapy patient satisfaction reports. Patients completed the surveys after treatment at both Southampton and Fawley sites, between the 28th of July 2014 and the 11th of August. The questionnaire is made of 8 questions, which include:
1). The efficiency and ease of telephone contact
2). The time availability of the appointment times offered
3). The waiting area facilities
4). The punctuality of therapist
5). The explanation of your diagnosis and treatment
6). The overall standard of care you received
7). Would you recommend us to a friend?
8). What could we have done better?
(Questions 1-6 were rated from 1(poor) to 5 (excellent))
A total of 19 questionnaires were completed during this time. Results have been compared to those collected in 2011. This year has been chosen as the results gathered are reliable and clearly laid out in statistical format. They have also been used as a 3-year time gap should show to be enough time for an improvement to occur within sections. Here are the results:
RESULTS:
(1= poor 5= excellent)
Fawley data Southampton data
(Q1) – 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 4 (Q1) – 5, 4, 5, 4, 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5
(Q2) – 4, 5, 5, 4, 5, 5, 4 (Q2) – 5, 4, 4, 3, 5, 4, 4, 4, 5, 3, 4, 5
(Q3) – 2, 4, 4, 2, 5, 5, 3 (Q3) – 5, 4, 5, 4, 4, 4, 3, 4, 5, 4, 2, 5
(Q4) – 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 4 (Q4) – 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 4, 5, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5
(Q5) – 4, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 4 (Q5) – 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5
(Q6) – 4, 5, 5, 5, 5, 5, 4 (Q6) – 5, 5, 5, 4, 5, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 5, 5
What percentage of results was in the ‘higher tier’
Higher tier is a tier I have created which is made up of ratings ‘very good’ (4’s) and ‘excellent’ (5’s). NFPS should be aiming to get into Top Band, in order to provide the best experience for patients.
From the results, 93.8% of results fell into the top band, which is extremely positive.
(Q1). The efficiency and ease of telephone contact
(1= poor 5= excellent)
| Poor | Below Average | Average | Very Good | Excellent |
| 0/19 | 0/19 | 0/19 | 10/19 | 9/19 |
- 100% of patients perceived the efficiency to be within the top band (Ratings 4/5’s)
- 2011 results – 92.3% in higher tier.
(Q2). The time availability of the appointment times offered
(1= poor 5= excellent)
| Poor | Below Average | Average | Very Good | Excellent |
| 0/19 | 0/19 | 2/19 | 9/19 | 8/19 |
- 4% of patients perceived the availability of appointment times offered to be within the top band (Ratings 4/5’s)
- 2011 results – 84.6% in higher tier.
(Q3). The waiting area facilities
(1= poor 5= excellent)
| Poor | Below Average | Average | Very Good | Excellent |
| 0/19 | 2/19 | 3/19 | 8/19 | 6/19 |
- 6% of patients perceived the quality of waiting area facilities to be within the top band (Ratings 4/5’s)
(Q4). The punctuality of therapist
(1= poor 5= excellent)
| Poor | Below Average | Average | Very Good | Excellent |
| 0/19 | 0/19 | 0/19 | 8/19 | 11/19 |
- 100% of patients perceived the punctuality of the therapist to be within the top band (Ratings 4/5’s)
- 2011 result – 84.6% in higher tier
(Q5). The explanation of your diagnosis and treatment
(1= poor 5= excellent)
| Poor | Below Average | Average | Very Good | Excellent |
| 0/19 | 0/19 | 0/19 | 7/19 | 12/19 |
- 100% of patients perceived the explanation of diagnosis and treatment to be within the top band (Ratings 4/5’s)
- 2011 result – 84.6% in higher tier
(Q6). The overall standard of care you received
(1= poor 5= excellent)
| Poor | Below Average | Average | Very Good | Excellent |
| 0/19 | 0/19 | 0/19 | 5/19 | 14/19 |
- 100% of patients perceived the overall standard of care received to be within the top band (Ratings 4/5’s)
- 2011 result – 69.2% in higher tier
(Q7). Would you recommend us to a friend?
- 100% would recommend us to a friend.
- 2011 result – 100% would recommend us to a friend
(Q8). What could we have done better?
What patients feel need improving:
– Waiting area – This was mentioned in the comments sections of the questionnaires and also scored relatively low in comparison to other results from the surveys (Question 3 was the only question to record a below than average reading).
– Better instructions on how to find where it is in the business centre.
Action:
Based on the results, New forest physiotherapy could do:
- A video to go on the website, which would show people where to walk when they get to the building as a few people have mentioned it was difficult to find the clinic inside the Solent business centre.
- Laminates with arrows showing where the Physiotherapy clinic is. This isn’t so realistic as most other companies in Solent business centre would then want to do the same thing.
- Encourage patients at the Gang Warily clinic to sit in the viewing gallery while they wait for an appointment. This area is quieter, warmer, and a better surrounding compared to waiting just inside the main door.
Unfortunately due to structural design at both Gang Warily and Solent Business Park, it is not possible to extend or build a waiting area just for NFP patients.
How do the results compare to those from 2011
From looking at the data collected in 2011, it is evident that numerous sections have improved. The efficiency and easy of telephone contact is one example. 2011 results record data in average and below average sections, where as 2014 data is 100% within very good and excellent. This could be due the call answer service now used within the clinic. I expect to see a further increase in the amount of ‘excellent’ results received due to the hiring of an Administrator at the Southampton Clinic come August.
Another section that has improved is the availability of appointment times. 2011 results were not as strong as those recorded in 2014 due to 4% of patients perceiving the availability in 2011 to be ‘poor’ and 11% percent scored ‘average’. 2014 results however are 89.4% in the higher tier, with only 10% of patients perceiving it to be average. This is a small improvement of 2011, but an improvement nonetheless.
Added comments from Questionnaires:
Positive:
- Friendly, caring, supportive treatment.
- Good price and local.
- Good information.
- Quick booking. Very punctual.
- Professional and friendly.
- Friendly, good communication.
- Friendly and found the cause of my pain
- Professional and courteous
- Friendly and professional
- Everything was quick and punctual
- Treatment really helped pain
- Friendly, Relaxed. Good understanding of symptoms
NEW FOREST PHYSIOTHERAPY PATIENT SATISFACTION SURVEY 2014
The overall standard of care you received
(1= poor 5= excellent)
| Poor | Below Average | Average | Very Good | Excellent |
| 5/19 | 14/19 |
Comments from Questionnaires:
- Friendly, caring, supportive treatment.
- Good price and local.
- Good information.
- Quick booking. Very punctual.
- Professional and friendly.
- Friendly, good communication.
- Friendly and found the cause of my pain
- Professional and courteous
- Friendly and professional
- Everything was quick and punctual
- Treatment really helped pain
- Friendly, Relaxed. Good understanding of symptoms