| home | meetings | events | miscellanea | contacts |
| 2012 |
Executive Committee Members: Emilio Ceraudo (EC), Patricia Daniels (PD), John Doland (JD), Doris Halls (DoH), David Harper (DaH), Joyce Jarvis (JJ), Nick Martensz (NM), Josephine Powell (JP), Chris Stannard (CS), L.M. Stockman (LMS)
Roland Morcom (RM) was absent with apologies.
Surgery Representatives: Jenny Moyes (JM), Dr Susan Stanton (DrSS)
Invited Speaker: Helen Macdonald (HM)
Helen Macdonald from the Primary Care Research Network was the evening's guest speaker. The PCRN provides an opportunity for patients to get involved in medical research. Research studies and trials are part of the NHS, not distinct from it. Many of these studies are carried out by GPs and dentists. Nearly half of all GP surgeries in NHS Cambridgeshire and Peterborough are research-active.
Research is also often carried out between universities and the NHS. Funding may come from the government, charities or other sources. The details of the study must be approved by the NHS ethics committee before the study can take place. Once it has been approved and the data has been accumulated (over a period of months or years), the data is analysed and conclusions drawn.
Patients may volunteer to participate in a study. This may be as simple as filling in a questionnaire or may be more complicated, such as giving blood or tissue samples, altering diet, trying new drugs, etc. Patients may also participate at an earlier stage: deciding what should be researched, how to conduct the research and what to do with the results. Patients help keep research in the 'real world' and make sure studies answer the questions that are important to patients rather than what are important to academics.
If patients decide to take part in a study, they can withdraw at any time. Their regular treatment is not affected.
The job of the PCRN is to get practices involved. It has been organised to streamline the research procedure, making it easier for surgeries and patients to participate.EC said that he had once taken part in a study and once he was finished, never got a word of thanks from the researchers nor any information on the outcome of the study. HM agreed that patients need to be acknowledged and kept informed. The PCRN doesn't have an ongoing connection with the research group until publication but thinks the researchers should get back to patients and GPs with their findings.
CS wanted to know who judged the ethics. HM said that the NHS research ethics committee had to approve a study before it was allowed to proceed. CS then asked how much interaction there was between research groups in order to prevent duplication of effort. HM replied that a research group had to justify itself to whomever was funding it and that research groups were very aware of similar studies being undertaken. When asked about how patients could find out about local clinical studies, HM said that the new web site would soon have a list.
DaH asked HM how the Committee could help the PCRN in its duties. HM said that the PCRN invited a lot of people to participate but had a very low response rate. Letters of invitation usually turned up out of the blue. The trick is to make it seem normal to take part in studies. This might be done in the following ways:
JD thanked the speaker on behalf of the Committee.
The minutes from the meetings of 31 October 2012 were approved pending minor corrections to the attendance records. JD was acting chairman.
JP was one of the patients who did not receive a letter inviting her to the public meeting in October where the tendering process for health provision in Bar Hill was discussed. She received a letter explaining that invitations were sent out one per household rather than one per patient. DaH pointed out that this was nonsense as both he and LMS got separate letters despite having the same address. Other Committee members confirmed the same thing happening in their households. JM said that she knew of at least one patient, the only person in her household who was a patient at the surgery, who did not get a letter. She suggested that we put on the web site that anyone who did not receive a letter should contact Sue Last.
Action: LMS will amend the web site.
DrSS also commented that GPs did not want to be TUPE'd between providers; they wanted permanent contracts!
LMS reported that the new leaflet was available at the web site. She also forwarded a copy of the file to JM and printed several copies to deliver to the Parish Council Office where they were enthusiastically received. PD passed around a few colour copies of the leaflet that she had printed off earlier.
Action: LMS will make the latest up-to-date version of the leaflet available at the web site.
The idea of keeping a notebook or folder of past minutes and reports of the PPG available in reception at the surgery was discussed last time. JD was concerned that only the approved minutes and reports should be made available.
Action: JM will put a folder containing publicly available information about the PPG in the surgery reception area.
DaH said he often got special offers on business cards and suggested that this might be an inexpensive way of advertising the PPG. The cards could be handed out at the surgery or, as JM suggested, put in other places such as the post office to catch the attention of patients who don't come into the surgery often. It also might be a good idea to put up PPG posters in the library, the village hall and/or the social club. JD said that we needed to get the PPG information on the front page of the Bar Hill News to attract attention.
Action: JD will approach the editor of the Bar Hill News.
DaH summarised the annual report which has been online since early November. It was unanimously approved. CS suggested that a copy of the activities leaflet be sent to Alan and Alison Baker who approached the PPG in May about supporting patients with long-term or chronic illnesses.
JD's candidacy for Chairman was proposed, seconded and approved unanimously.
DoH's candidacy for Vice-Chairman was proposed, seconded and approved unanimously.
DaH's candidacy for Secretary was proposed, seconded and approved unanimously.
CS explained that the Committee has been asked to move into the TNT Room in the main church building to make room for the Brownies. The Brownies are losing their venue at the primary school and need another place to meet. The church secretary set up the TNT Room as a meeting room and a number of Committee members looked at it prior to the annual general meeting. Everyone who saw the set up said it looked very good. CS said it might be a better arrangement than the current one (in the Octagon) in that the room will be set up prior to our arrival. No more moving furniture before and after the meeting.
Action: DaH will contact the church secretary to accept the offer of the use of the TNT Room on the last Wednesday of the month beginning in January.
LMS noticed last month that the surgery web site was out-of-date but reported that it had been brought up-to-date this week. JM said there had been some problems with the company which set up the web site but that she had finally got editorial control and was able to update it.
JM said that CATCH was looking for two patient representatives to serve on its executive committee. CS asked what would happen if no one came forward to represent the surgery and JM replied that there was no penalty, just no representation. PD asked how the CATCH appeal was being distributed to patients. JM said there were posters in the surgery. CATCH suggested using a mailshot but declined to fund one as it is very expensive.
Action: JM will put a link to CATCH on the surgery web site.
JM reported that
JM also noted that there were a number of anonymous unfavourable comments about the surgery at the NHS web site. It is unknown whether these people are even patients of the surgery since JM has not received any complaints via the complaints process. This means any problems that are arising in the practice cannot be addressed. LMS pointed out that its the complainers who usually take the time to fill out these forms, particularly if anonymous comments are allowed. JM agreed and encouraged patients having a positive experience to also fill out the NHS web form.
CS asked how the flu vaccination statistics for the surgery were affected by patients who had their jab elsewhere, like at work. JM said that the surgery noted if a patient told them about having their vaccination elsewhere.
DrSS confirmed that the Acorn Partnership had put in their bid for providing health care services at the Bar Hill Health Centre and that the first meeting in the tendering process would be in early January. DaH said that he wouldn't be able to attend the meeting in support of the bid but could prepare a written statement if necessary.
JJ asked when the repeat prescription box at the surgery was emptied. JM replied that it was emptied at 8:30 every morning and sometimes more often as needed. It takes two days for the surgery to process the prescription and if the prescription is sent directly to Tesco pharmacy, then Tesco takes a little time to prepare it too. Patients need to allow a full two working days before picking up their prescription. EC wanted to know what to do if a patient suddenly found that s/he had run out of their medication and needed it quickly. JM said that emergency prescription requests should be brought into reception for faster service, but that this was the exception rather than the rule. LMS inquired about prescriptions that run out over the holidays. JM said to submit repeat prescription requests early and put a note on the form explaining why.
The meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m.
The next ordinary meeting of the Executive Committee of the PPG will take place at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, 30 January 2012, in the TNT Room at Bar Hill Church. Tea and coffee will be served before the meeting, from 6:00 p.m.
Copyright ©2013 by the maple surgery patient participation group
Last updated on 1 February 2013 by the Webmaster