Agenda item

34.1     The Committee considered an update report on the implementation of the ophthalmology transformation programme at East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust (ESHT), including updates on the areas that HOSC made recommendations on as part of its review of the service change.

34.2     The Committee asked how many disabled bays would be at Bexhill Hospital after the changes to parking had been made.

34.3     Lesley Carter, Matron for Ophthalmology, explained that there would be at least six disabled bays on the left hand side of the main entrance to the hospital. There would also be an additional two disabled bays in the car park on the right hand side of the hospital road going down, and that would be designated for patients only. This would result in an extra four disabled bays.

34.4     The Committee asked whether phase 3 of the transformation programme had been paused due to the Government’s announcement on changes to the New Hospitals Programme, and when phase 3 was now expected to be completed.

34.5     Richard Milner, ESHT Chief of Staff, explained that the pause to phase 3 was unrelated to the New Hospitals Programme as the ophthalmology transformation programme had been funded through ESHT’s own regular capital programme. Mike Farrer, ESHT Head of Transformation, explained that phase 3 was still required however there was more time to deliver it because it related to ensuring there was sufficient capacity to meet the 10 year activity projections. Phase 3 would be taken forward at the appropriate time in line with the Trust’s priorities and sufficient capital being available. 3 options were being explored as part of delivering phase 3, and the future demand and capacity model was being refreshed to ensure the new unit was the right size given recent activity changes. An options appraisal would be taking place in summer, after which implementation timelines could be determined.

34.6     The Committee asked if there were enough staff to maintain the service at its current level.

34.7     Lesley Carter, explained that phase 1 & 2 of the transformation programme had created space in outpatients which would allow the appointment of an additional full-time glaucoma consultant. There had also been an increase in the number of middle-grade doctors, and funding to support and expansion in nursing and non-medical staffing levels to support the service.

34.8     The Committee asked whether the service was sufficient without the implementation of phase 3.

34.9     Pantellis Ioannidis, Clinical lead for Ophthalmology, explained that at the moment the service is fully functional and available for patients. The benefits of phase 3 would be to bring optometrists and orthoptists who currently work out of Conquest Hospital into the same unit. The optometrists and orthoptists at Conquest could work safely and independently without consultant supervision, but bringing the whole ophthalmology unit together would benefit staff by increasing the skill mix of staff and have the full service under one roof.

34.10   The Committee asked about issues with non-emergency patient transport and how ESHT would be able to ensure patients could attend their appointments.

34.11   Richard Milner, noted that one of the benefits of the service changes had been improved patient satisfaction and friends and family tests. This feedback had not shown that access to the patient transport service had been a common, thematic challenge for people accessing the service. ESHT had given a lot of thought prior to implementation about the impacts of moving some services from Hastings to Bexhill, and how that would affect patients in Hastings, although the feedback on the service had shown that people were happier with the service now, as it meant they were being seen quicker. ESHT continued to monitor the impact of the changes, particularly for patients from areas of deprivation.

34.12   The Committee noted that some people have challenges accessing the Bexhill Hospital site and asked whether ESHT had given consideration to how this could be improved, including working with other partners.

34.13   Mike Farrer noted that this was an issue for some patients but that ESHT had not looked into road layout or infrastructure issues outside the hospital, there were discussions with the Transport Manager at ESCC on how to improve transport access given that some of the roads and footpaths around the hospital were difficult for some residents to navigate. Some improvements were included on the shortlist for schemes to be included as part of a future round of Bus Service Improvement Plan funding.

34.14   The Committee asked for some further information on the roles of the travel coordinators and Eye Care Liaison Officers (ECLOs).

34.15   Mike Farrer noted that HOSC had recommended the creation of a Travel Liaison Officer as part of the transformation to provide a single point of contact for patients who experience difficulty in attending their appointment or arranging hospital transport. Instead of having a role only of ophthalmology patients, a single point of access for patients to receive advice and support on travel and access had been included in the new non-emergency patient transport service (NEPTS) contract to open that up to patients visiting all specialities. The single point of access could also signpost patients to other services than just the NEPTS for those not eligible. This would be monitored as part of the implementation of the new contract and that data could be shared once available. The ECLO supported patients with both clinical needs and practical arrangements for coming into clinics, which meant ophthalmology patients had an additional level of support.

34.16   The Committee asked about how planning for phase 3 would be considered in the context of changes to the New Hospitals Programme (NHP).

34.17   Richard Milner explained that ESHT was talking to all local MPs and councils and in light of changes to the NHP, was reviewing its capital programme and prioritising the most necessary and important investments. ESHT continued to lobby to try and bring NHP and other funding forward.

34.18   The Committee RESOLVED to:

1)    note the report; and

2)    receive an update once there had been further developments on the future of phase 3.