London Sexual Health Programme

Methods

One off

Events

More info

Working with community groups

More info

Clinics often collect service user feedback using comments cards or electronic feedback. This can be useful for obtaining quick overviews but is unlikely to provide in depth feedback or genuinely engage service users in services.

More info

Electronic real-time feedback

More info

Information for patients

It is important to inform patients about opportunites for engagment in service improvement as well as reporting back to patients the results of their input. The attached document gives some ideas for how to display such information in clinics.

More info

Needs assessment

The attached document is a toolkit for doing SH needs assessments from the DH/Design Options

More info

Surveys (public)

More info

Surveys (service users)

More info

Website feedback

Websites often have the option for 'feedback' from users. The case studies demonstrate more innovative examples including feedback on a youtube video and a website actually designed by service users

More info

Collecting views in depth

Co-production approach

This details a method called The Problem Wall and Solution Tree

More info

Facebook

More info

Focus groups

More info

Online forum/network

More info

Participatory Action Research

More info

Patient shadowing

More info

Qualitative interviews

More info

Social Marketing

More info

Staff training on PPE

More info

User forums

More info

You're Welcome

More info

User designed

Helping with design of materials

Service users can provide valuable input into the design of materials such as posters, leaflets or questionnaires

More info

Helping with service design

When designing services, service user input can be very valuable in creating services which people want to use

More info

Innovative methods

Innovative media such as video, drawing, music and photography are useful ways to engage certain groups. The linked examples give some ideas.

More info

Mystery shopping

More info

Patient representatives (peer support)

This document describes how a patient rep can be used for peer support and PPE

More info

Peer education

More info

Peer/community researchers

Training peers to conduct interviews or other research within their community can be a very useful method of obtaining views, particularly in groups whose voices are often unheard

More info

Self-management/outreach

Healthcare which engages patients in their care, such as self-management programmes, can also be used as an opportunity to obtain their input into service improvement

More info

Policy and decision making

Developing strategy

Service users can provide input into strategies

More info

Facilitating direct contact with decision-makers

Some initiatives are putting the public in direct contact with people who make decisions about their health services, such as MPs and commissioners

More info

Leadership programs/role models

Initiatives to create community 'leaders' are particularly useful in this area given the influence of stigma

More info

Spending of ‘sticker coins’ to simulate funding distribution

This was an innovative method used in one project, whereby patients are given sticker 'coins' and asked to allocate them to areas of the service. Please refer to the article by Hitchings et al for details on how this method works

Pros :	Cost effective way to reach a large group of people. Useful to access the public/non service users.
Cons :	Hard to get in-depth views. Require attendance by a large number of people.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Can access specific groups. Existing groups with members facilitate recruitment.
Cons :	May not be the required audience. Reliance on other organisations.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Anonymous. Part of NHS structure. Instant
Cons :	Response may be low Very limited feedback
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Formal structures are available
Cons :	Data may be estimated. Takes a lot of time.
Downloads :	SH Needs Assessment toolkit.pdf (1098 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Obtaining views of a more representative sample of the public
Cons :	Difficult to recruit for and response rates are often low
	Show all tools using this method.

London Sexual Health Programme

Navigation

In this section

Methods

One off

Collecting views routinely

Collecting views in depth

User designed

Policy and decision making

Downloads :	Electronic Real time feedback.pdf (910 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Downloads :	Posters.PP.ppt (310 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Can be user-designed or use/adapt existing surveys. Can have researcher present to explain them. Large and diverse samples possible. Low cost
Cons :	Two dimensional Limited by space on forms. Usually biased towards positive feedback. Often not considered ‘PPE’ as routine practice. Some groups may be less likely to respond
Downloads :	Surveys (service users) step b.doc (34 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Access large numbers of people, including non-service users.
Cons :	Relies on user initiative
	Show all tools using this method.

Downloads :	Co production (the problem wal.doc (71 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Can reach a wide audience. Can combine with health promotion/ awareness
Cons :	Anonymity not possible so feedback is limited
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Can be run with an existing group and using their facilities/ rules. Participants can learn from each other. Can be run with an existing group and using their facilities/ rules
Cons :	Difficult to recruit for. Hard to do regularly. May have to limit groups to single sex, language etc
Downloads :	Focus groups step-by-step.doc (37 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	More convenient than having to attend.
Cons :	Requires internet skills and moderation by staff.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Innovative and flexible non written tools. Gives a structure. Allow participants to control and own the process
Cons :	Participants unlikely to be familiar with concept of PAR. Researcher directed. May take time/money Challenging due to stigma
Downloads :	Participatory action research .doc (24 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	May be better for sensitive subjects. In-depth One on one are confidential.
Cons :	Difficult to recruit due to stigma. May not be representative. Can be expensive. Can produce a ‘tirade’ of personal experience
Downloads :	Qualitative interviews1.doc (37 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Accessing and developing partnerships with hard to reach groups. Avoiding researcher bias. Good for sensitive subject of SH due to increased trust. Personal development for researchers. Associated public awareness of SH.
Cons :	Needs extensive training and payment for researchers. Matching of interviewers according to one criteria e.g. ethnicity may overlook other factors. Can threaten anonymity.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Adaptable method which understands the social context.
Cons :	May require expertise
	Show all tools using this method.

Downloads :	Staff Training.doc (48 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	On-going engagement
Cons :	Difficult to recruit for. Hard to do regularly.
Downloads :	User forums.doc (24 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Downloads :	Helping with design of materia.doc (45 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Gives ownership of service to the users.
Cons :	Requires time and effort.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Enables participation from those with poor English language or literacy. Makes PPE fun for the patients.
Cons :	Can require extensive resources.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Formal cycle, with a toolkit available. Can evaluate the whole patient pathway. Participants have a very clear role with terms and conditions and payment.
Cons :	Often does not include the whole care pathway. Bias may be introduced if external 'shoppers' are not used Can be difficult to recruit for. Time needed for training and support. Ethical challenges.
Downloads :	mystery shopping.pdf (1213 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Combines support for patients with PPE. Integrates patients into the team
Cons :	Very unusual to be used in a meaningful way. Need to be paid to be meaningful.
Downloads :	Patient rep or advocate.doc (122 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Very effective (health promotion and PPE). Peers can aid recruitment. Can provide accredited training. Can be part of programs such as school sex education and health outreach.
Cons :	Need staff, resources, funding to support the peer educators. On-going commitment from participants.
Downloads :	Peer education.docx (17 kb)
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Combines support for patients with PPE
Cons :	Need staff, resources, funding
	Show all tools using this method.

London Sexual Health Programme

Navigation

In this section

Methods

One off

Collecting views routinely

Collecting views in depth

User designed

Policy and decision making

Toolkit search

Pros :	Meaningful engagement
Cons :	Need to understand the strategy.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Empowers individuals. Meaningful engagement.
Cons :	Not confidential. Requires extensive commitment. Participants need to understand decision making processes.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Empowers individuals. Personal development for participants. Can help overcome stigma and increase community involvement
Cons :	Requires extensive commitment from participants to undergo training etc. Time and resources.
	Show all tools using this method.

Pros :	Realistic Enjoyable for participants Provides information on finance
Cons :	Takes time to explain and carry out.
	Show all tools using this method.