Browse site A to Z

Search results

Go To Advanced Search

Finance and Performance Reports 2020-21 Month 4 July 2020

Description: 2020/21 Finance Report - Month 4 Report to: Board of Directors and Finance & Investment Committee August 2020 Title: Finance Report for
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/2020/finance-and-performance-reports-2020-21-month-4-july-2020-1.pdf

Cisplatin-Pembrolizumab-Pemetrexed

Description: Chemotherapy Protocol LUNG CANCER – NON-SMALL CELL (NSCLC) CISPLATIN-PEMBROLIZUMAB-PEMETREXED Regimen • NSCLC – Cisplatin-Pembrolizumab-Pemetrexed Indication • Pembrolizumab in combination with
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/Chemotherapy-SOPs1/Lung-cancer-non-small-cellNSCLC/Cisplatin-Pembrolizumab-Pemetrexed.pdf

Papers Council of Governors - 26 January 2022

Description: Agenda attachments 1 CoG Agenda - 26.01.2022.docx Date Time Location Chair Agenda Council of Governors 26/01/2022 14
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/2022-Trust-documents/Papers-Council-of-Governors-26-January-2022.pdf

Institutional information_2021_final

Description: Institutional information – key facts for inclusion as appropriate Support statements must be personal to your application to avoid the same document
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Grants/Download/Institutional-information-2021-final.pdf

Whooping cough study - volunteers information sheet

Description: Chief Investigator Professor R. C. Read Southampton National Institute for Health Research Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Facility Southampton Centre for Biomedica
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Patient-information-sheet/Whooping-cough-study-volunteers-information-sheet.docx

UHS register of interests June 2025

Description: Employee Name Aarvold, Dr Alice Beatrice Rachel Aarvold, Dr Alice Beatrice Rachel Adam, Dr Robert Dhugald (Rob) Adam, Dr Robert Dhugald (Rob) Adam, Dr Robert Dhugald (Rob) Adam, Dr Robert Dhugald (Rob) Adam, Dr Robert Dhugald (Rob) Adam, Dr Robert Dhugald (Rob) Adam, Dr Robert Dhugald (Rob) Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Afzal, Dr Nadeem Ahmad Akerman, Dr Catherine Mary Elizabeth Akerman, Dr Catherine Mary Elizabeth Akerman, Dr Henry (Harry) Akerman, Dr Henry (Harry) Akerman, Dr Henry (Harry) Al Rawi, Dr Samar Othman Abed Al Baki (Samar) Al Rawi, Dr Samar Othman Abed Al Baki (Samar) Al Rawi, Dr Samar Othman Abed Al Baki (Samar) Al Rawi, Dr Samar Othman Abed Al Baki (Samar) Al Rawi, Dr Samar Othman Abed Al Baki (Samar) Al-Azzawi, Dr Omar Muataz Shnasi Alderton, Dr Mark Vernon Alderton, Dr Mark Vernon Alderton, Dr Mark Vernon Allan, Dr Charlotte Georgina Allan, Dr Charlotte Georgina Allen, Dr David Charles Allen, Dr David Charles Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Amerasinghe, Ms. Nishani Anderson, Mr. David Frederick Anderson, Mr. David Frederick Anderson, Mr. David Frederick Anderson, Mr. David Frederick Role Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Consultant Interest Declared Y Y Interest Category Financial interests Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Indirect interests Y Indirect interests Y Indirect interests Y Indirect interests Y Indirect interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Y Financial interests Interest Situation Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Outside employment Outside employment Hospitality Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Sponsored events Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Donations Sponsored events Sponsored events Sponsored events Sponsored research Y Financial interests Sponsored research Y Financial interests Sponsored research Y Indirect interests Clinical private practice Shareholdings and other Y Indirect interests ownership interests Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Shareholdings and other Y Financial interests ownership interests Shareholdings and other Y Financial interests ownership interests Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Indirect interests Clinical private practice Shareholdings and other Y Financial interests ownership interests Y Indirect interests Clinical private practice Non-financial Y professional interest Outside employment Non-financial Y professional interest Outside employment Non-financial personal Y interests Loyalty interests Y Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Indirect interests Donations Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Financial interests Donations Y Financial interests Hospitality Y Financial interests Hospitality Y Financial interests Hospitality Shareholdings and other Y Financial interests ownership interests Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored research Non-financial personal Y interests Sponsored events Non-financial Y professional interest Hospitality Non-financial Y professional interest Outside employment Non-financial Y professional interest Sponsored events Non-financial Y professional interest Sponsored research Y Financial interests Outside employment Y Financial interests Clinical private practice Y Financial interests Sponsored events Y Financial interests Sponsored events Interest Description I have a private orthopaedic list once per month. I have a private list once a month . - Attended a educational event at the Abbott research facility in Sylmar, California, USA. - All travel cost, accomidation and meals were provided for by Abbott. - During the trip I provided 2.5 hours of feedback on future product development which I recieved a consultation fee for. In September 2022 I was part of the expert panel at the New Evidence based approach to Implementing the Four Pillars of HFrEF training event and I received HCP honorarium fees of £250 from AstraZeneca to participating in the event. On the 15th of November 2022 I attended a dinner/update event at the Harbour Hotel in Southampton that was sponsored by Medtronic LTD. I recieved a consultancy fee from AstraZenaza for speaking of cardiovscualar risk in COPD. I recieved a speakers fee from Astra Zeneca for apprearing at a Cardiometabolic GP Symposium. I recieved a speakers fee from Zoll for giving a presentation at EHRA. In September 2023 I attended a CRT training course in Denmark which was funded by Merit Medical. CANDOVER CLINIC BASINGSTOKE I do private work at Candover clinic, Basingstoke and North Hampshire Hospital, Aldermaston Road, Basingstoke RG24 9NA I have a private practice at Candover Clinic in Basingstoke and Spire Southampton. However, my practice at Spire Southampton is minimal, as it was intended for private endoscopies, which have not been possible due to a lack of support from the Spire hospital team. I practice at the Candover Basingstoke and the Spire A sum of 9,750 £ received from Dana Fry, a parent for purchase of a Paediatric Fibroscan probe. This is to be used for NHS practice. The moneys were deposited in Charity fund I sought sponsorship from Nutricia to organise a regional Wessex Gastroenterology meeting. The aim of this meeting is to maintain effective regional communication, discuss guidelines and standards of practice, and include presentations with key learning points for our day-to-day work. Comments This does not impact on my NHS work This is a regular list that has no impact on my NHS practice. - The trip was approved by to my line manager. - Merit funded all travel, accommodation and hospitality cost Private practice outside working hours for UHS I see patients with paediatric gastroenterology conditions in the clinic The fibroscan probe will be exceptionally useful for managing and treating children with liver fibrosis CoI Date From CoI Date To 16/09/2024 25/07/2022 25/07/2023 20/07/2022 24/09/2022 21/09/2022 21/09/2022 15/11/2022 15/11/2023 12/09/2024 12/09/2024 22/05/2024 22/05/2024 30/03/2025 30/03/2025 16/09/2023 18/09/2023 01/05/2021 04/10/2022 01/05/2021 01/12/2023 18/10/2024 01/12/2022 19/11/2021 27/02/2024 27/02/2024 Talk on national symposium sponsored by Falk, UK. However I haven't received any moneys yet. I declared my conflict of interest at the talk and the sponsorship didn't influence the content of my talk. WESSEX PAEDIATRIC GI NETWORK MEETING CI for The ACTIVE-IBD Study RHM CHI1102 Awarded 400£ for the study by CICRA - Childhood Crohns Research Association PAID TO PROVIDE LUNCH AND TEA FOR DELEGATES ATTENDING MEETING THE NETWORK MEETING IS FOR TEACHING AND DISCUSSION OF NETWORK PROTOCOLS - THIS TIME WE ARE DISCUSSING MANAGEMENT OF GI BLEEDING IN CHILDREN Ethics REC - Sep 2021 Study started - Nov 2021 35/50 recruited into study 19/10/2023 18/10/2022 18/10/2022 01/02/2022 EnablExercise in Crohns: A qualitativE study to uNderstAnd the Barriers and faciLitators to physical activity and Exercise IN children and adolescents with CROHN’S disease – perceptions of patients, caregivers and clinicians The aim of this project is to understand the barriers to and facilitators of physical activity and exercise training in children and adolescents with Crohn’s disease – incorporating the views of young people with Chrohns, their parents/guardians and doctors. Awarded 25K by GUTS UK (national bidding) Principal applicant DR Zoe Saynor - i m co-applicant SPONSORED RESEARCH My husband works as an anaesthetist in private practice moneys not awarded yet still to commence Granted 25K from GUTS UK to conduct research on Crohns in children with IBD 01/02/2022 01/11/2021 04/10/2022 30/11/2023 My husband has developed an app that allocates staff to vacancies in healthcare. Private healthcare providers are using this currently. I undertake private practice in my own at all the local private hospitals I have shares in Zelemiq Life Science Limited which is a local electronics company that helps other companies navigate through regulatory pathways. They also are creating the Ripple- a non invasive continuous glucose and lactate monitor I part own Alloc8tor that is a company linking together healthcare professionals with available outside work. We currently do no business with UHS or with the NHS. We have a contact with the Nuffield Hospital chain nationally and some other smaller contacts with other private hospitals. We have no plans to sell the company currently 30/11/2023 20/01/2022 01/01/2030 18/02/2024 26/02/2030 20/01/2022 01/04/2025 I am a member of SAS partnership and as such provide anaesthesia services locally. I work with a few surgeons closely and may pick up some as hoc sessions when offered to the group 04/01/2022 04/01/2023 I am part of SAS LLP which includes many colleagues from my trust. We provide anaesthetic services individually and as a group to local surgeons as well as other local providers such as ECT for the RSH. 04/11/2024 I have practicing privileges at both the Nuffield and Spire hospitals. In the past this included choose and book NHS patients but more recently the large majority is insured or self funding. Practicing privileges at both the Nuffield and Spire hospitals I continue to work in local private sectors and will occasionally have UHS outsourced patients on some of my lists 01/12/2020 31/12/2021 01/01/2022 01/01/2023 01/01/2023 31/12/2023 I am the sole shareholder and director of two companies. The first one is Al-Azzawi Trading Limited (Company number 13862060), which is an E-Commerce company that trades medical items such as stethoscopes, ophthalmoscopes, and consumer ECG monitors, as well as non-medical items. The suppliers are exclusively dealt with through eBay, Aliexpress, and Alibaba, while buyers are sold to through I would like to state that this is a declaration of interest rather than a declaration of conflict of interest. None of the time spent directing eBay. The second company is Al-Azzawi Businesses Limited (Company number 13829506), which is a property investment company in the form of Buy-To-Let. either of the two companies is part of my contracted time with the trust, nor does it happen on the trust premises. 28/03/2022 I have worked within the joint NHS/Private Palforzia peanut immunotherapy clinic. This is joint with Southampton NHS Trust however the immunotherapy is not offered via NHS services and it was felt best option to be able to offer this to some of our patients within the region. It does not impact on NHS duties running on a weekend and my role is very much supporting the service rather than leading it. I have not really worked in the service this year and will only support if staff sickness 18/01/2024 Designated doctor for child deaths for Hampshire, isle of Wight, Portsmouth and Southampton. Employed via HIOW ICS Potential COI but likely impact more for HIOW ICB 11/02/2020 NHSE SE Long COVID CYP lead No real conflict of interest to the hospital here 18/01/2024 Married to Mr Edward Gardner Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon at UHS Asked to declare this at previous appraisals I undertake private clinical practice in Clinical Neurophysiology at the Sarum Road (Circle) Hospital Winchester I run one or two clinics per week, lasting 3 hrs each. We previously completed in a sponsored running event and raised money for the Smile for Wessex (Neuro) charity, which donated a few thousand pounds. We are currently potential beneficiaries of the Smile for Wessex charity, with regards to them funding equipment for a second VT bed. Continued work at Wessex Nuffield and Southampton Spire Also ad hoc work at Prema Clinic Portsmouth Do private practice at Southampton Spire and Nuffield wessex and Prema Laservision Educational Grant from Thea Pharmaceuticals £500 Attended list at Western Eye to watch Miniject insertion Moorfields international Glaucoma meeting - delegate iStent meeting - lecture given Hotel room booked by iStar Registration, dinner and hotel room for one night paid by Thea Pharmaceuticals Honorarium from Glaukos 01/11/2008 26/09/2022 26/09/2022 01/01/2010 12/03/2024 03/10/2021 12/03/2024 14/01/2024 08/02/2022 25/06/2023 02/11/2023 27/01/2024 15/09/2023 Paid a refundable deposit to buy shares in a new private non NHS hospital, where I hope to carry out private practice work in the future AbbVie Advisory Board Advisory Board on Durstyra Basic Glaucoma Course - organizer and facilitator - Alcon Basic Surgical Glaucoma Course, held at Alcon Education Centre, Barcelona Booth talk and podcast at European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons Conference on Elios Chair and organiser of Corneal & Glaucoma Southern Meeting Sponsered by Thea Pharmaceuticals Chair of Wessex Glaucoma Forum Chair of Wessex Glaucoma Meeting Chaired Nguenity 1.5 meeting Chaired Southern Glaucoma and Corneal Meeting Educational Grant Elios Advisory Board Glaukos Advisory Board Honoria from Alcon for Advanced Glaucoma Surgical Course Hydrus Meeting Chaired Honorarium received Alcon Eye Care Hydrus Workshop Hydrus Workshop Course facilitator and lecturer International Glaucoma Consortium - participant Interview for Ophthalmologist magazine Interview on Gemini Study for the Ophthalmologist magazine Lecture series x 4 lectures in Singapore Speaker Lecture to Singapore Audience "More than meets the Eye" MIGS unplugged interview On advisory board for AbbVie Allergan for intracameral drugs use Preserflo User Group Meeting Chair of meeting Speaker at Cataract and Glaucoma Update meeting Wessex Glaucoma Meeting Real world data study in Glaucoma Honorarium paid by AbbVie Honoria received from AbbVie Advice on novel drug delivery to NHS Travel Hotel and dinners paid Honoria paid Course organizer and facilitator/lecturer Honorarium paid Course sponsored Accommodation, flights paid Honorarium paid by Elios Conference registration paid by Elios Hotel room & Dinner paid by Thea Pharmaceuticals Honoria paid Educational event for Wessex Glaucoma consultants Honoria received from Thea Pharmatceuticals Honoria received from Thea Pharmaceuticals Honorarium paid by Alcon Honorarium paid by Thea including hotel room for one night Educational Grant from Thea Pharmaceuticals to attend WGC Educational Event Honorarium from Elios travel , hotel and dinner paid Honoria paid Payments on 13th and 20th May 2025 Educational event for new technique being introduced to Trust Attended event registration, travel and accommodation covered by Alcon UK Honorarium paid by Alcon Honorarium paid by ICG Honorarium from Sight Sciences Honorarium paid by Sight Sciences Honorarium , flights , accommodation x 2 nights paid by AbbVie Honorarium received from AbbVie Honorarium paid by International Glaucoma Consortium Honorarium paid by Santen Hotel room booked Honoria received from Scope Chaired meeting Honoria received from Santen Educational event Sponsorship of data analysis and research methodology from AbbVie 12/05/2025 23/04/2024 01/12/2022 01/12/2022 08/01/2025 10/01/2025 17/04/2024 19/04/2024 07/09/2024 14/03/2025 14/03/2025 12/10/2022 12/10/2022 25/11/2022 25/11/2022 07/09/2024 08/12/2023 27/06/2023 01/07/2023 09/09/2023 10/04/2025 11/04/2025 23/04/2025 24/04/2025 06/07/2023 20/04/2023 21/04/2023 14/06/2024 31/05/2024 08/09/2023 07/09/2024 04/03/2024 05/03/2024 16/08/2023 02/06/2024 07/02/2022 21/11/2023 17/05/2023 17/05/2023 16/05/2023 16/05/2023 01/10/2022 Sponsorship of Charitable endeavor - Everest in the Alps to raise money for Glaucoma UK Sponsorship gained from ELIOS Vision; Santen UK; Thea Pharmaceuticals; iStar Medical Benefit to NHS - raises profile of Glaucoma 28/02/2023 03/03/2023 Sight Sciences Dinner WGC 2023 28/06/2023 28/06/2023 President-Elect UK & Eire Glaucoma Society Professional body affiliated to Glaucoma UK charity 04/05/2022 Educational event - Hydrus Workshop Registration , travel and accommodation covered by Alcon UK 20/04/2023 21/04/2023 Real world study of glaucoma data with Medisoft and research sponsored (no direct financial payment) by AbbVie Consultancy agreement between DFA and Leica Microsystems 20/04/2022 on-going private practice as detailed in Job Plan Leica Microsystems Visualization Summit October 2022 Southampton Corneal Meeting sponsored by Thea Pharmaceuticals Standard NDA and consultancy agreement for advice and presentation to Leica Microsystems from 2022Evening lecture 05/12/2021 20/04/2022 27/09/2023 24/07/2024 13/10/2022 13/10/2022 23/03/2023 23/03/2023 Anjum, Mr. Syed Neshat Anjum, Mr. Syed Neshat Anjum, Mr. Syed Neshat Ansell, Dr Gillian Lindsay (Gilly) Antonakis, Dr Serafeim Antonakis, Dr Serafeim Antonakis, Dr Serafeim Antonakis, Dr Serafeim Antony, Mrs. Shaibi Armstrong, Mr. Thomas Armstrong, Mr. Thomas Armstrong, Mr. Thomas Armstrong, Mr. Thomas Armstrong, Mr. Thomas Armstrong, Mr. Thomas Arshad, Mr. Ali Ahmed Osman Ali (Ali) Arshad, Mr. Ali Ahmed Osman Ali (Ali) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Ayer, Miss Mavis Grace (Mavis) Baker, Mr. Peter Stuart Balabanidou, Miss Eleni Balabanidou, Miss Eleni Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barker, Dr Ruth Emily Barratt, Mr. James Matthew Bateman, Dr Andrew Rea Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Specialist Nurse Practitioner Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Nurse Manager Y Manager Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Manager Y Manager Y Manager Y Manager Y Manager Y Manager Y Manager Y Manager Y Dietitian Specialist Practitioner Y Consultant Y Financial interests Financial interests Non-financial professional interest Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Indirect interests Financial interests Loyalty interests Clinical private practice Financial interests Financial interests Clinical private practice Shareholdings and other ownership interests Financial interests Non-financial professional interest Financial interests Financial interests Indirect interests Non-financial personal interests Non-financial personal interests Non-financial professional interest Indirect interests Non-financial professional interest Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Non-financial personal interests Non-financial personal interests Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Sponsored events Hospitality Sponsored events Sponsored events Sponsored events Loyalty interests Sponsored events Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Hospitality Hospitality Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Hospitality Hospitality Hospitality Hospitality Sponsored events Sponsored events Outside employment Financial interests Non-financial personal interests Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Non-financial professional interest Outside employment Loyalty interests Sponsored posts Sponsored posts Sponsored posts Sponsored posts Sponsored posts Sponsored posts Sponsored posts Sponsored posts Indirect interests Financial interests Sponsored events Clinical private practice I have got private practice privilege in Spire Southampton & Wessex Nuffield Hospitals My private practice mirrors NHS practice I do private practice in Spire & Nuffield hospital and my practice mirrors my NHS practice. I am joint owner of a LLP company with my spouse. His private practice income (HealthShare Winchester, Nuffield Hospital, Chandlers Ford) is paid directly into that company. My spouse also works in industry for a small company called OCG (orthopaedic Consulting Group) as a CMO and this income is also paid directly into the LLP. He does 1 day a week in industry and 1/2 day a week private practice. I have private practice privileges at Spire Southampton Hospital I see patients and do private Vitreoretinal and Cataract surgery through self-referral or/and insured work. Overall Time Commitment: Dedicated session on Job plan or weekends. (Information included in my previous portfolio appraisal documents) I perform cataract surgery un the ICS (NHS pathway) with the following providers: - Newmedica (since October 2020) I stopped working with the following providers: - Optegra (November 2020 - July 2022) - SpaMedica (June 2021 - June 2022) Overall time commitment: Dedicated session on job plan for private work or/and weekends with no on-call commitment or/and non-working time of NHS job plan. (already included in my previous portfolio documents) (14-6-2023: updated status) Service Contract Agreement with New Medical Systems Ltd as Shareholder and Joint Venture Partner in Newmedica Solent OJV. (Contract agreement signed - Newmedica Solent OJV will start offering its services from mid-September 2023) Sponsorship by Alimera to attend American Academy of Ophthalmology (virtual) Congress. As it is stated in the agreement document with Alimera, sponsorship does not constitute an inducement to prescribe, recommend, buy or sell any medicine or product. (Agreement document and details of sponsorship already included in my portfolio appraisal documents.) I have attended MS Trust conference from 23/03/2025 to 25/03 /2025 ENETS Honorarium paid by AAA to lecture at UKINETs symposium Ipsen paid for registration, travel and accommodation to ENETs in Vienna sponsored by AAA Committee member for UKINETs IPSEN Funded attendance at ENETS Conference 2022 and honorarium for supporting an educational event I do private practice in the same clinical sphere private practice I undertake clinical private practice at Spire Hospital Southampton Attending meeting for Merck conference Sponsorship to Conference (CMSC) Roche Ad board Sanofi Advisory Board Novartis Advisory board £420 Advisory board ( Roche) Advisory board Biogen CHARMS steering committee 5-7pm £540 Chairing an evening meeting Roche Chairing and speaking at a Biogen symposium at conference Chairing and speaking at an evening meeting/debate. Novartis Chairing national meeting Chairing sponsored symposium Charing evening meeting ( Merck) Evening Steering committee meeting with Novartis Filming for Merck Interview for market research for Roche paid £100 MS Nursing Connections ad board Meeting for an hour at 2pm Merck Advisory Board Merck Steering Committee Merck Steering committee meeting ( evening) Nursing Practice conference speaker Paid speaking engagement at REALMS Paid speaking engagement ( evening meeting with Novartis) Paid speaking engagement at Get Smart ( Novartis) Paid speaking engagement at INFORM MS Recording of podcast with Biogen Roche Steering committee Roche steering committee meeting ( paid) Roche- chairing a national meeting Roche- promotional material consultancy Roche- sponsorship to attend CMSC ( international conference) and chairing meetings Sanofi advisory board Sanofi- roundtable consultancy Speaker at an evening meeting, sponsored by Novartis Speaker conference Speaking at Biogen meeting for Saudi Nurses. Two separate days 45 mins each Speaking at a conference( Roche) Speaking at a conference, Nurse at the Limits Speaking at a meeting for Merck Speaking at a symposium ( Janssen) Speaking at an evening meeting Steering Committee meeting Steering committee 23rd of March and 27th of March £300 Virtual Advisory Board 5-8pm Biogen £452 ongoing commitment 6pm-7pm 2 hour evening meeting Sponsorship to CMSC Sponsorship to ECTRIMs Milan ( biogen) Sanofi- delegation to ECTRIMS international conference Speaker at conference and hospitality Sponsorship to International Conference Unknown amount Sponsorship to International conference unknown amount 01.05.25: Appointment as Director of YMCA Fairthorne Housing Trustee position of a local charity. I do not consider this to create a conflict of interest with my role at UHS Since the 1st of June 2021 I have started working with Practice Plus Group in Southampton as a Consultant. I hold a part time contract with the company of 20hrs a week. I treat NHS patients there as well. It currently keeps my elective operating skills up to date as my SUHT Contract is purely trauma operating. I am married to another Orthopaedic Hand Surgeon who is currently an employee of Practice Plus Group in Southampton Community Manager: Community Manager (a peer-support and forum) for ‘Healthcare Professionals in Research’ group - unpaid role. Early Career Working Group committee chair: Chair of international committee with American Thoracic Society Pulmonary Rehabilitation Assembly - unpaid role. National co-lead: National co-lead for /AHP's Everywhere’ group - unpaid role. Visiting Fellow: Visiting Fellow contract with UoS - unpaid role. Community Manager: Community Manager (a peer-support and forum) for ‘Healthcare Professionals in Research’ group - unpaid role. Early Career Working Group committee chair: Chair of international committee with American Thoracic Society Pulmonary Rehabilitation Assembly - unpaid role. National co-lead: National co-lead for /AHP's Everywhere’ group - unpaid role. Visiting Fellow: Visiting Fellow contract with UoS - unpaid role. Sponsorship of BIMDG conference by Nutricia Metabolics Private Oncology practice conduct at Spire Southampton and Genesis Southampton private clinical practice mirrors NHS practice i.e. Clinical Oncology for GI cancer Is ongoing 09/11/2024 22/06/2022 22/06/2022 22/06/2022 09/01/2020 20/09/2020 28/10/2020 09/06/2023 12/11/2021 13/11/2021 23/03/2025 25/03/2025 12/03/2024 14/03/2024 04/12/2022 04/12/2022 22/03/2023 24/05/2023 05/02/2022 05/03/2035 09/03/2022 11/03/2022 05/02/2022 16/05/2023 01/01/2021 07/02/2022 26/04/2024 26/04/2024 21/04/2023 22/04/2023 27/05/2024 02/06/2024 11/12/2024 11/12/2024 30/11/2022 30/11/2022 12/05/2022 19/06/2024 19/06/2024 01/12/2022 01/12/2022 08/11/2021 09/11/2021 21/11/2024 21/11/2024 26/03/2023 24/01/2023 24/01/2025 25/01/2025 17/09/2022 17/09/2022 03/04/2025 03/04/2025 21/02/2023 13/08/2024 13/08/2024 13/10/2021 13/10/2021 05/02/2025 05/02/2025 22/10/2024 22/10/2024 27/07/2022 27/07/2022 06/09/2022 06/09/2022 27/02/2025 27/02/2025 09/11/2022 09/11/2022 09/06/2023 09/06/2023 28/11/2023 28/11/2023 11/11/2023 11/11/2023 21/09/2023 21/09/2023 07/02/2023 18/04/2023 18/04/2023 03/10/2023 03/10/2023 20/06/2025 21/06/2025 23/04/2025 23/04/2025 26/05/2025 02/06/2025 28/02/2023 23/04/2025 23/04/2025 28/11/2023 28/12/2023 30/09/2022 01/10/2022 04/03/2023 05/03/2023 10/02/2024 10/02/2024 16/11/2024 16/11/2024 13/11/2024 13/11/2024 19/03/2024 19/03/2024 16/10/2024 16/10/2024 03/09/2024 03/09/2024 23/03/2022 25/11/2021 25/11/2021 29/05/2023 03/06/2023 11/10/2023 13/10/2023 23/09/2025 26/09/2025 17/09/2024 20/09/2024 31/05/2022 04/06/2022 31/05/2022 04/06/2022 01/05/2025 01/05/2028 01/06/2021 30/06/2022 06/05/2012 10/11/2021 01/01/2020 01/04/2022 01/07/2022 19/04/2021 01/01/2020 01/04/2022 01/07/2022 19/04/2021 11/06/2024 12/06/2024 01/10/2007 22/11/2024 Bateman, Professor Adrian Calvin Bateman, Professor Adrian Calvin Bates, Dr Andrew Tom Bates, Dr Andrew Tom Bates, Dr Andrew Tom Bates, Dr Andrew Tom Baxter, Dr Mark Alan Beck, Mr. Nicholas Edward Beecham, Mr. Ryan Christopher Beedle, Mr. Matthew Ian (Matt) Belgi, Dr Geeta Belgi, Dr Geeta Berry, Mrs. Lisa Jane Bevan, Ms. Amanda Bhargava, Dr Vidhi (Vidhi) Bhatnagar, Dr Adityanarayan Bhatnagar, Dr Adityanarayan Birch, Mr. Brian Robert Peter Birkett, Mr. Lewis Terence Blackwell, Ms. Nicola (Nicky) Blackwell, Ms. Nicola (Nicky) Blake, Mrs. Sinead Patricia (Sinead) Boswell, Dr Owen David Boulos, Mr. Nabil Adel Aziz Bowley, Mr. Adam Marcus Haydon Boyce, Dr Sara Rosalind (Sara) Boyce, Dr Sara Rosalind (Sara) Boyce, Dr Sara Rosalind (Sara) Boyce, Dr Sara Rosalind (Sara) Brain, Dr Amanda Rachel Brander, Mr. Matt Lee Breen, Dr David John Breen, Dr David John Breen, Dr David John Briant, Mr. Jason Scott (Jase) Broadbent, Miss Bethany (Beth) Broadley, Dr Rachel Jane Broadley, Dr Rachel Jane Bromby, Mr. Mark David Brooks, Mrs. Julie Bryant, Dr Timothy Bryant, Dr Timothy Bryant, Dr Timothy Bryant, Dr Timothy Bujanova, Dr Jana Bull, Mr. Colin Lawrence Bulters, Mr. Diederik Olivier Bulters, Mr. Diederik Olivier Bulters, Mr. Diederik Olivier Burke, Dr Georgina Burke, Dr Georgina Burke, Dr Hannah Burke, Mr. Martin James Burke, Mr. Martin James Burke, Mr. Martin James Butler, Mrs. Eleanor Mary (Eleanor) Byrne, Dr James Patrick Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Analyst Y Manager Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Nurse - Advanced Practitioner Y Pharmacist Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Manager Y Occupational Therapy Specialist Practitioner Y Occupational Therapy Specialist Practitioner Y Specialist Nurse Practitioner Y Consultant Y Pharmacist Y Physiotherapist Specialist Practitioner Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Associate Specialist (Closed to new entrants) Y Manager Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Analyst Y Specialist Healthcare Science Practitioner Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Specialist Healthcare Science Practitioner Y Nurse Manager Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Manager Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Consultant Y Manager Y Manager Y Manager Y Physiotherapist Manager Y Consultant Y Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Indirect interests Non-financial professional interest Clinical private practice Loyalty interests Clinical private practice Hospitality Hospitality Loyalty interests Clinical private practice Financial interests Clinical private practice Financial interests Outside employment Non-financial professional interest Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Hospitality Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Loyalty interests Sponsored events Clinical private practice Clinical private practice Outside employment Financial interests Non-financial personal interests Sponsored events Gifts Indirect interests Clinical private practice Indirect interests Outside employment Financial interests Indirect interests Outside employment Clinical private practice Non-financial professional interest Sponsored events Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Non-financial personal interests Non-financial personal interests Financial interests Financial interests Non-financial professional interest Non-financial personal interests Clinical private practice Outside employment Outside employment Outside employment Sponsored events Outside employment Gifts Sponsored events Sponsored events Sponsored events Gifts Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Non-financial professional interest Financial interests Gifts Outside employment Shareholdings and other ownership interests Clinical private practice Loyalty interests Hospitality Financial interests Financial interests Hospitality Hospitality Financial interests Indirect interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Financial interests Non-financial professional interest Financial interests Non-financial personal interests Outside employment Sponsored events Outside employment Clinical private practice Outside employment Outside employment Sponsored events Sponsored events Sponsored events Gifts Non-financial personal interests Hospitality Non-financial personal interests Financial interests Financial interests Hospitality Clinical private practice Outside employment I undertake private practice at the Spire Southampton and Wessex Nuffield Hospitals I am registered with Source Bioscience and Backlogs - which are remote locum companies in cellular pathology I am the Editor in Chief of the journal Diagnostic Histopathology and receive an honorarium for this. Private Practice with admitting rights at UHS, Spire Southampton Hospital and Genesis Care Southampton. 3 hours per week on Wednesday am in Job Plan. Honoraria for talk to Astra Zeneca Sponsored Satellite Symposium at BTOG January 2022. £800 Hospitality from Genesis Care: Dinner Lainston House Hotel 2/12/21 Dinner Ennios Restaurant, Southampton 6/10/22 Mr wife, Claire Walsh (Bates) is a GP Partner at Stockbridge Surgery. Chemotherapy mostly delivered at UHS in Solent Suite. Radiotherapy delivered at UHS and Genesis Care. Most of my Private Practice radiotherapy is now with Genesis Care at Spire Southampton Hospital. Previously most of my Private radiotherapy was delivered at UHS, but the waits are now too long. Patients from Stockbridge Surgery are referred to UHS 05/02/2022 01/09/2024 05/02/2022 01/09/2024 01/06/2006 31/12/2025 27/01/2022 27/01/2022 02/12/2021 06/10/2022 01/01/2010 31/12/2025 I do a weekly private outpatient clinic at Spire/Nuffield. This takes about 4 hours per week This has been ongoing for many years, no change and doesn't impact my NHS practice 25/09/2022 31/03/2023 General and colorectal surgeon including outpatients, endoscopy/colonoscopy, operating. Practicing at: Spire Southampton Hospital, Chalybeate Close, Southampton SO16 6UY Nuffield Health Wessex Hospital, Winchester Road, Chandlers Ford, Eastleigh SO53 2DW Tuesday pm colonoscopy Spire hospital Tuesday evening Outpatients Nuffield hospital (variable/ad hoc surgery) Updated 04.09.24 confirmed private practice as outlined. 01/10/2004 04/09/2024 Looking to be Part Time self employed (weekend work) to be a system analyst for other UK Hospital Sites which use the same software we use in critical care (MetaVision). The skills I have built within my First time filling one of these in so i am happy to reply with more information if needed. I have set the date to a year as i am unsure how the current role within the trust would aide in my Part Time self employment i.e. analysing databases and building reporting solutions I would currently remain as a full time member of UHS. part time self employment will last for in its early stages. 11/05/2023 11/05/2024 Flights, accommodation and conference attendance at the the CPSI (TruBridge) conference in the USA in May 2024. TruBridge are the supplier we partner with to develop My Medical Record. This conference will include an in-person user group (with other TruBridge customers). It will also include meetings with the TruBridge product team, where we will discuss alignment (including potential blockers) of the TruBridge and My Medical Record product roadmaps. I notified my line manger (David Cable) as soon as I received the invite and I also have a approval from Jason Teoh (CIO). I do private work at nuffield. This work is on a wednesday and is documented in the job plan My work at Spire is in NHS hours only. I have private practice to declare I notified my line manger (David Cable) as soon as I received the invite and I also have a approval from Jason Teoh (CIO). I've added this as 'non-financial professional interest' although I'm not sure if that is the correct category? It seemed the best fit from the options. I have private practice to declare. My practice is at the nuffield and Spire hospitals 28/04/2024 03/05/2024 01/06/2022 06/06/2023 01/06/2023 07/06/2024 Advisory Board Member for: DGH Pharma (Europe) Ltd Kemp House 160 City Road London United Kingdom EC1v 2NX Payment received for education session at meeting sponsored by Chiesi. I work for Spire Southampton, Nuffield Wessex hospitals outside of NHS hours. I do remote reporting for Backlogs limited. I work in the private hospital as a consultant oncologist. Private hospitals include Spire Southampton, Genesis radiotherapy, new hall hospital Salisbury. I also undertake private patient work at UHS Southampton Working with GCUK - private radiotherapy provider. Working as a clinical oncologist for approximately 3 to 4 hours a week as MR -Linac specialist. Currently UHS does not have MR Linac therefore there is no direct conflict of interest. have either received research grants, honoraria to speak at, chair and attend meetings or liaised/received educational material from representatives of the following companies over the last 20 years: · Astellas · Pfizer · Ipsen · Glaxo Smith Kline · Sanofi · Lilly · Bayer · Amgen · Ferring · Takeda · Comvita · AstraZenecaJanssen-Cilag · Janssen The latest were from 1. Janssen to attend (as faculty) the prostate cancer summit in the UK (2020) 2. Laborie for providing a presentation to be used at the ICS meeting in Melbourne (20210) (2020) Christmas food box from a supplier - Softcat – of mostly perishable items (crisps, chocolate, cranberry sauce, biscuits, bottle of wine). The market value of the items is estimated at less than £15. Generally thee support provide has been to attend conferences or fund research. I do not hold shares (directly) in any companies providing health care resources of any kind to the NHS or other like companies. I have a Private Practice based at the Wessex Nuffield that might be considered a potential conflict of interest to my work with the NHS and UHS but I manage this along NHS and UHS guidelines and do not perform any procedures there that I do not perform on the NHS other than reversal of vasectomy as this is not generally funded by the NHS. Given the relatively low value, perishable nature, and inconvenience of returning the item to the supplier, it was deemed appropriate for the team to keep this food box. 01/06/2022 31/12/2022 01/04/2021 31/03/2022 20/02/2023 24/03/2025 01/01/2009 31/03/2025 01/04/2024 31/03/2025 07/02/2002 08/07/2022 20/12/2023 20/12/2023 Private OT consultations, on an as and when basis. This is not advertised through verbal or printed advertisements, social media or verbally mentioned, within my current role 27/03/2024 Sole Trade Home/ Mobile Beauty Therapist Case Support/ Brilliant Minds- Epilepsy Teaching (Self Employed) The Grove, North Road Dibden/ Longview, Fryern Court Road Private Epilepsy Awareness and emergency medication training sessions No committed hours/ as and when needed (approx. 4-10 hours per month) Private practice and member of SAS Received sponsorship for flight and hotel accommodation relating to a professional conference in Madrid, Spain. Sponsorship covered only the two days of the conference. Conference details: XLH international conference. Date: 18-19th April 2024. Sponsor: Kyowa Kirin. I prescribe burosumab at UHS, a biological therapy for children with a rare condition (XLH). The therapy is manufactured by Kyowa Kirin. I am an associate of MDT Rehab providing private clinical physiotherapy in an intermittent capacity. 1/ training as AstraZeneca speaker - 19/3/24 £1080 2/talk for AstraZeneca - 16/10/24 £405 Speaker fee- AstraZeneca £500 speaker fee for Sanofi - £760 Advisory board for CSL Behring Sponsorship to attend ISTH congress by Sanofi This is an ongoing Profession before i initially started my first employment at UHS Dec 2008 I will not advertise or provide information about private practice unless specifically asked. If the information is requested I will offer a number of options and not declare which company I am associated with. 17/10/2023 07/06/2022 13/07/2023 14/07/2023 17/04/2024 19/04/2024 01/11/2023 01/01/2024 01/01/2025 21/09/2023 21/09/2023 03/07/2023 03/07/2023 17/01/2023 I have my own business as a sole trader - making and selling dichroic glass jewellery. This is entirely conducted in my own time. Christmas food box from a supplier - Softcat – of mostly perishable items (crisps, chocolate, cranberry sauce, biscuits, bottle of wine). The market value of the items is estimated at less than £15. Proctor and advisory board to Neuwave/Johnson&Johnson. Proctoring for Boston Scientific on image-guided Cryoablation Given the relatively low value, perishable nature, and inconvenience of returning the item to the supplier, it was deemed appropriate for the team to keep this food box. On-site proctoring on image-guided microwave ablation. Payment made to UoS Southampton Charitable fund. Onsite proctoring- payments made to UoS Southampton charitable fund. 04/01/2024 21/12/2023 21/12/2023 07/06/2018 22/06/2022 Advisory panel to Varian/Siemens healthcare systems. Christmas food box from a supplier - Softcat – of mostly perishable items (crisps, chocolate, cranberry sauce, biscuits, bottle of wine). The market value of the items is estimated at less than £15. Technical advice. Usually consulted at conferences. Given the relatively low value, perishable nature, and inconvenience of returning the item to the supplier, it was deemed appropriate for the team to keep this food box. 01/06/2021 22/06/2022 21/12/2023 21/12/2023 One-time receipt of cheque to value of £152 payable to myself from Mortuary Fund. Mortuary fund accrues voluntary donations from various/multiple external bodies (namely funeral directors) to UHS mortuary in recognition of additional assistance provided to these companies by mortuary team outside of their contracted role (e.g. patient handling & chasing paperwork). The total amount donated to the fund in each calendar year is divided equally amongst all mortuary employees annually, with all members of team (9x staff B3-B8a) receiving an equal share. No interests as received from multiple & various different donors on a voluntary basis. No service contracts are in place between UHS mortuary & donors and so no opportunity for influence in decision making. Terema Ltd: provision of teaching for Human Factors training company. Paid daily rate on attendance. No financial stake in business. As above 01/04/2021 31/03/2022 06/02/2022 31/12/2024 Founder of REN Think Ltd Facilitation of education and training in team skills, human factors, leadership; speaker 13/04/2025 30/04/2034 Spire Southampton Hospital Chalybeate Close Southampton SO16 6UY Occasional spinal cord monitoring performed during spinal operations (usually scoliosis correction). 2-3 cases per year. 01/01/2015 Coordinator of the Wessex Branch of the Infection Prevention society Infection Prevention society Blackburn House, Redhouse Road, Seafield, Bathgate, West Lothian, EH4 7AQ BSIR 2022 attenda
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/UHS-register-of-interests-June-2025.pdf

Papers Trust Board - 5 November 2024

Description: Date Time Location Chair Apologies Agenda Trust Board – Open Session 05/11/2024 9:00 - 11:30 The Ark Conference Centre, HHFT/Microsoft Teams Jenni Douglas-Todd Diana Eccles 1 Chair’s Welcome, Apologies and Declarations of Interest 9:00 Note apologies for absence, and to hear any declarations of interest relating to any item on the Agenda. 2 Minutes of Previous Meeting held on 10 September 2024 Approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 10 September 2024 3 Matters Arising and Summary of Agreed Actions To discuss any matters arising from the minutes, and to agree on the status of any actions assigned at the previous meeting. 4 QUALITY, PERFORMANCE and FINANCE 9:10 Quality includes: clinical effectiveness, patient safety, and patient experience 4.1 Briefing from the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee Keith Evans, Chair 4.2 Briefing from the Chair of the Finance and Investment Committee Dave Bennett, Chair 4.3 Briefing from the Chair of the People and Organisational Development Committee Jane Harwood, Chair 4.4 Briefing from the Chair of the Quality Committee Tim Peachey, Chair 4.5 Chief Executive Officer's Report 9:25 Receive and note the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer 4.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 6 9:35 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer 4.7 Finance Report for Month 6 9:55 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer 4.8 ICB Finance Report for Month 6 10:10 Receive and discuss the report Sponsor: Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer 4.9 Recovery Support Programme (RSP) Undertakings - Self Assessment 10:20 Review and discuss the self-assessment Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer 4.10 10:30 People Report for Month 6 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Steve Harris, Chief People Officer 4.11 Cancer Patient Experience Survey Results 2023 10:45 To receive and discuss the results Sponsor: Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer Attendee: Ali Keen, Head of Cancer Nursing 5 STRATEGY and BUSINESS PLANNING 5.1 Corporate Objectives 2024-25 Quarter 2 Review 11:00 Review and feedback on the corporate objectives Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer Attendees: Martin De Sousa, Director of Strategy and Partnerships/Kelly Kent, Head of Strategy and Partnerships 5.2 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Update 11:10 Review and discuss the update Sponsor: Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer Attendee: Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary 6 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, RISK and INTERNAL CONTROL 6.1 Feedback from the Council of Governors' (CoG) Meeting 23 October 2024 11:15 (Oral) Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair 6.2 Register of Seals and Chair's Actions Report 11:20 Receive and ratify In compliance with the Trust Standing Orders, Financial Instructions, and the Scheme of Reservation and Delegation. Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair 7 Any other business 11:25 Raise any relevant or urgent matters that are not on the agenda Page 2 8 Note the date of the next meeting: 7 January 2025 9 Items circulated to the Board for reading 9.1 CRN: Wessex 2024-25 Q2 Performance Report Note the report Sponsor: Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer 10 Resolution regarding the Press, Public and Others Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair To agree, as permitted by the National Health Service Act 2006 (as amended), the Trust's Constitution and the Standing Orders of the Board of Directors, that representatives of the press, members of the public and others not invited to attend to the next part of the meeting be excluded due to the confidential nature of the business to be transacted. Page 3 Agenda links to the Board Assurance Framework (BAF) 5 November 2024 – Open Session Overview of the BAF Risk 1a: Lack of capacity to appropriately respond to emergency demand, manage the increasing waiting lists for elective demand, and provide timely diagnostics, that results in avoidable harm to patients. 1b: Due to the current challenges, we fail to provide patients and their families / carers with a high-quality experience of care and positive patient outcomes. 1c: We do not effectively plan for and implement infection prevention and control measures that reduce the number of hospital-acquired infections and limit the number of nosocomial outbreaks of infection. 2a: We do not take full advantage of our position as a leading University teaching hospital with a growing, reputable, and innovative research and development portfolio, attracting the best staff and efficiently delivering the best possible treatments and care for our patients. 3a: We are unable to meet current and planned service requirements due to the unavailability of staff to fulfil key roles. 3b: We fail to develop a diverse, compassionate, and inclusive workforce, providing a more positive staff experience for all staff. 3c: We fail to create a sustainable and innovative education and development response to meet the current and future workforce needs identified in the Trust’s longer-term workforce plan. 4a: We do not implement effective models to deliver integrated and networked care, resulting in sub-optimal patient experience and outcomes, increased numbers of admissions and increases in patients’ length of stay. 5a: We are unable to deliver a financial breakeven position, resulting in: inability to move out of the NHS England Recovery Support Programme, NHS England imposing additional controls/undertakings, and a reducing cash balance impacting the Trust’s ability to invest in line with its capital plan, estates/digital strategies, and in transformation initiatives. 5b: We do not adequately maintain, improve and develop our estate to deliver our clinical services and increase capacity. 5c: Our digital technology or infrastructure fails to the extent that it impacts our ability to deliver care effectively and safely within the organisation, 5d: We fail to prioritise green initiatives to deliver a trajectory that will reduce our direct and indirect carbon footprint by 80% by 2028-2032 (compared with a 1990 baseline) and reach net zero direct carbon emissions by 2040 and net zero indirect carbon emissions by 2045. Appetite (Category) Minimal (Safety) Cautious (Experience) Minimal (Safety) Open (Technology & Innovation) Open (workforce) Open (workforce) Open (workforce) Cautious (Effectiveness) Cautious (Finance) Cautious (Effectiveness) Open (Technology & Innovation) Open (Technology & Innovation) Current risk rating 4x5 20 3x3 9 4x4 16 3x3 9 4x5 20 4 x3 12 4x3 12 3x3 9 3x5 15 4x5 20 3x4 12 2x3 6 Target risk rating 4 x 2 Apr 6 27 3 x 2 Mar 6 26 2 x 3 Apr 6 27 3 x 2 Mar 6 25 4 x 3 Mar 12 26 4 x 2 Mar 8 27 3 x 2 Mar 6 25 3 x 2 Apr 6 25 3 x 3 Apr 9 25 4 x 2 Apr 8 27 3 x 2 Apr 6 27 2 x 2 Dec 4 24 Agenda links to the BAF No Item 4.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 6 4.7 Finance Report for Month 6 4.8 ICB Finance Report for Month 6 4.9 Recovery Support Programme (RSP) Undertakings – Self Assessment 4.10 People Report for Month 6 4.11 Cancer Patient Experience Survey Results 5.1 Corporate Objectives 2024-25 Quarter 2 Review Linked BAF risk(s) 1a, 1b, 1c 5a 5a 5a 3a, 3b, 3c 1b All Does this item facilitate movement towards or away from the intended target risk score and appetite? Towards Away Neither x x x x x x x Minutes Trust Board – Open Session Date Time 10/09/2024 9:00 – 13:00 Location Conference Room, Heartbeat/Microsoft Teams Chair Jenni Douglas-Todd (JD-T) Present Dave Bennett, NED (DB) Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer (GB) Jenni Douglas-Todd, Chair (JD-T) Diana Eccles, NED (DE) (9:00-10:00 and 12:00-13:00) Keith Evans, Deputy Chair and NED (KE) David French, Chief Executive Officer (DAF) Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer (PG) Steve Harris, Chief People Officer (SH) Jane Harwood, NED/Senior Independent Director (JH) Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer (IH) Tim Peachey, NED (TP) Joe Teape, Chief Operating Officer (JT) Alison Tattersall, NED (AT) In attendance Martin De Sousa, Director of Strategy and Partnerships (MDeS) Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary (CM) Lauren Anderson, Corporate Governance and Risk Manager (LA) (item 6.1) Jane Fisher, Head of Health and Safety Services (JF) (item 7.2) Danielle Honey, Named Nurse for Safeguarding Children (DH) (item 5.13) Diana Hulbert, Guardian of Safe Working Hours and Emergency Department Consultant (DHu) (item 5.10) Duncan Linning-Karp, Deputy Chief Operating Officer (DLK) (item 5.5) Corinne Miller, Named Nurse for Safeguarding Adults (CMi) (item 5.13) Jenny Milner, Associate Director of Patient Experience (JM) (item 5.11) Jessica Bown, Midwifery Quality Assurance and Safety Matron (shadowing Gail Byrne) 1 member of the public (item 2) 5 governors (observing) 1 members of staff (observing) 2 members of the public (observing) Apologies Diana Eccles, NED (DE) (from 10:00-12:00) 1. Chair’s Welcome, Apologies and Declarations of Interest The Chair welcomed attendees to the meeting. There were no interests to declare in the business to be transacted at the meeting. 2. Patient Story Allan Peters was invited to relate his experience as a cancer patient, who had been diagnosed with stage 4 lymphoma, and, in particular, his experience of CAR-T cell therapy, which had been successful, with no reappearance of the cancer for more than a year. It was noted that the patient had had a positive experience with staff, and, when he collapsed, had been impressed by the reaction of a student nurse. Page 1 3. Minutes of the Previous Meeting held on 25 July 2024 The draft minutes tabled to the meeting were agreed to be an accurate record of the meeting held on 25 July 2024. 4. Matters Arising and Summary of Agreed Actions It was noted that action 1165 could be closed, and the relevant paper had been updated with the correct information. There were no other matters arising or actions overdue. 5. QUALITY, PERFORMANCE and FINANCE 5.1 Briefing from the Chair of the Finance and Investment Committee The chair of the Finance and Investment Committee was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 19 August 2024. It was noted that: • The committee had reviewed the Finance Report for Month 4 (item 5.7), noting that whilst the Trust was slightly off-plan, it was maintaining its trajectory in terms of an improved position. • The Trust was making progress in terms of its Always Improving programme with some reduction in length of stay. • There were a number of risks to the Trust’s achievement of its 2024/25 plan, including costs incurred from industrial action, insufficient funding for the pay award, and non-delivery of system transformation programmes. The Trust was also delivering £10m of unpaid activity. • The committee received a report from Estates, noting that there had been an improvement in the Trust’s ability to recruit staff. 5.2 Briefing from the Chair of the People and Organisational Development Committee The chair of the People and Organisational Development Committee was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 21 August 2024. It was noted that: • The committee had reviewed the People Report for Month 4 (item 5.9), noting that the Trust was below its target workforce level, although there had been an increase in use of bank staff due to the holiday period. The Trust was benefitting by £1.5m a month from these savings in staff numbers. • It was expected that the Trust would go above its planned staff numbers in September 2024 due to factors such as higher than assumed numbers of patients having no criteria to reside. • The committee received an update on violence and aggression in the context of the recent riots. 5.3 Briefing from the Chair of the Quality Committee The chair of the Quality Committee was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 19 August 2024. It was noted that: • The committee reviewed the Trust’s main quality indicators and noted that the indicators in respect of infection prevention were of concern. However, there had been a reduction in Emergency Department waiting times. • The Trust’s progress in implementing the measures under ‘Martha’s Rule’ was noted. • The committee received the annual medical safety report and reviewed consultant job planning. • There had been difficulties with porting over documents to a new IT system in Ophthalmology. Page 2 5.4 Chief Executive Officer’s Report David French was invited to present the Chief Executive Officer’s Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The 2024/25 pay award for Agenda for Change staff was due to be paid in October. In addition, the Government had made an offer to junior doctors, which appeared likely to be acceptable. There were concerns about the extent to which these pay awards would be fully funded. • The Trust had been formally notified of a collective pay grievance for healthcare support workers, which potentially impacted over 1,000 staff and was for up to six years of back pay. • The civil unrest in late July 2024 had had a significant impact on staff, especially from those from black and minority ethnic communities. • The New Hospitals programme had been paused, and the situation regarding the proposed new hospital near Basingstoke was unclear. Separately, the ‘Save Winchester Action Group’ had written to board members of the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board (HIOW ICB) expressing concerns about the proposed downgrade of Winchester hospital. • The Care Quality Commission had published its adult inpatient survey for 2023, which showed a deterioration in people’s experiences since 2020. • The Trust’s aseptic unit had received a positive audit report and had been assessed as being ‘low risk’. • An inspection of the Trust’s mortuary arrangements had been carried out by the Human Tissue Authority in August 2024. The outcome was awaited. • The NHS’s long-term plan process had commenced, with an expected emphasis on digital and moving away from hospitals to focus on the community and prevention. • The report by Lord Darzi on the NHS had been published. This indicated a variation in both quality of and access to NHS services across the country. • A workshop was scheduled in October 2024 regarding violence and aggression, with the focus now being on there needing to be a limit on what the Trust will tolerate and there being consequences, including exclusion of individuals. 5.5 Patient Safety and Quality of Care in Pressured Services Joe Teape was invited to present the paper ‘Patient Safety and Quality of Care in Pressured Services’, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • NHS England had sent all integrated care boards, integrated care partnerships, regional directors and NHS trusts and foundation trusts a letter on 26 June 2024 regarding urgent and emergency care, and requiring boards to assure themselves that the Trust is doing all it can to provide alternatives to Emergency Department attendance and admission, and to maximise in- hospital flow. • The Trust chose to queue patients in the Emergency Department, rather than in ambulances in order to be able to release ambulances. It was considered that this approach was safer than having patients remain in ambulances. • The Trust was able to provide good assurance based on its performance against the standards. • The HIOW ICB was proposing to introduce an initiative to reduce ambulance delays whereby patients would be released to the Emergency Department after 45 minutes. Page 3 5.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 4 Joe Teape was invited to present the Performance KPI Report for Month 4, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust was in the top quartile for seven out of nine measures. Of those where the Trust was below top quartile, one was 78-week waits due to the shortage of corneal transplant material, and the other was the 31-day standard, although improvement was expected. • The Trust was aiming to reduce its 65-week waiters to single digits by the end of September 2024. • There had been an increase in the relative mortality rate, the causes of which were being investigated. • The Trust had not had to open surge capacity. • Ward D4 had been closed for deep-cleaning to tackle candida auris. In terms of the spotlight on waiting lists, it was noted that: • The Trust’s waiting list had increased slightly in year by c.1,500, although the growth was in outpatients waits, not patients waiting for a procedure. • There was an opportunity to triage referrals, with use of advice and guidance for General Practitioners in particular. However, it was noted that GPs were not obliged to accept advice and guidance as an alternative to a referral, and the expected industrial action by GPs was seen as a risk. • The Trust had been successful in stabilising its waiting list, it would now be necessary to reduce it from c.60k to c.40k in order to meet the 18-week Referral To Treatment standard. Action: Gail Byrne agreed to look into the increase in ‘red flag’ staffing incidents in July 2024. 5.7 Finance Report for Month 4 Ian Howard was invited to present the Finance Report for Month 4, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust had recorded an in-month deficit of £3.9m and £16.9m year-to-date. The monthly position continued to improve month-on-month, and the Trust’s cost base remained relatively stable. • The Trust’s Elective Recovery performance would be key to achievement of its 2024/25 plan. There remained significant uncertainties in respect of the costs of industrial action, pay award funding, payments for 2023/24 Elective Recovery Funding (ERF), and 2024/25 ERF. • The reasons for the Trust’s variance to plan were largely driven by costs of industrial action, pay awards, unidentified Cost Improvement Programme (CIP), and non-delivery of system mental health and non-criteria to reside programmes. • Identification of CIP and pay controls were working well, and the Trust had delivered 126% ERF performance. • The Trust was anticipating a deficit of £3.8m and 128.5% ERF performance in Month 5. 5.8 Break 5.9 People Report for Month 4 Steve Harris was invited to present the People Report for Month 4, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: Page 4 • At the end of July 2024, the Trust was 288 Whole Time Equivalents (WTE) below its overall workforce plan. However, over the following months a significant increase in workforce numbers was expected due, largely, to the onboarding of newly-qualified nurses. • The Trust’s plan was predicated on the delivery of system programmes to reduce the number of patients having no criteria to reside and mental health patients. The assumed improvements in mental health patient numbers represented approximately 160 WTE. • There was a dispute with the Trust’s porters, with Unite threatening industrial action. 5.10 Guardian of Safe Working Hours Quarterly Report Diana Hulbert was invited to present the Guardian of Safe Working Hours Quarterly Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The previous year had been a difficult one for foundation year doctors due to the industrial action and associated press around this. • Changes in the structure of doctors’ postings and training had resulted in a loss of the previously firm structure and had generated uncertainty for those impacted. It was necessary to ensure that F1 and F2 doctors felt part of the UHS family. • Improvements in the induction process for F1 doctors were required. A twoweek shadowing period had been received positively. 5.11 Learning from Deaths 2024-25 Quarter 1 Report Jenny Milner was invited to present the Learning from Deaths report for Quarter 1 of 2024/25, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • Nationally, the Trust continues to benchmark lower than the expected death rates. • The morbidity and mortality reviews process required refining, as sharing of learning could be inconsistent as was the quality of reviews. A mobile application was being developed to help share learnings. • A recurrent theme had emerged via incident reporting in respect of out-ofhours paediatric palliative care advice and support, as no out-of-hours service had been commissioned. • There had been an increase in the number of complaints relating to the location of the death due to a lack of side rooms. Similarly, there was a lack of private spaces to have sensitive conversations. • A palliative care box had been trialled on Ward D3. Use of charity funding was being considered to enable this to be rolled out elsewhere. 5.12 Medical Appraisal and Revalidation Annual Report including Board Statement of Compliance Paul Grundy was invited to present the Medical Appraisal and Revalidation Annual Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The report was intended to enable the Trust to provide assurance that its professional standards processes meet the requirements of the Medical Profession (Responsible Officers) Regulations 2010 and related guidance. Page 5 • This was the second year of using a portal as part of the appraisals process, which had resulted in an improved user experience. • Compliance rates had continued to improve, and there was a good process in place to remind individuals to complete their appraisals. • There had been an increase in the number of appraisers and these were wellrated. Decision: Having reviewed the Annual Report, the Board approved the Statement of Compliance tabled to the meeting, and authorised either the Chair or Chief Executive Officer to sign the Statement on behalf of the Trust. 5.13 Safeguarding Annual Report 2023-24 Corinne Miller and Danielle Honey were invited to present the Safeguarding Annual Report for 2023/24, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • There had been a continued increase in activity across most services, and there had been a sustained increase in the number of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications across the Trust along with requests for support with complex Mental Capacity Act case management. • The year had been challenging due to a loss of key staff. • The Trust had undertaken work to update its policies and Level 3 Safeguarding Adult Training had been rolled out via the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). • A key area of work had been to review the pathway for adults with local authorities. The response from local partners remained challenging due, largely, to budgetary constraints at these other organisations. • The Trust’s children’s safeguarding team had carried out the self-assessment audit required by section 11 of the Children Act 2004, which highlighted no areas of specific concern or gaps. There had been an 28% increase in referrals as well as an increase in the level of complexity. • The adult safeguarding team had won the ‘UHS Champions Team of the Year’ award. 6. STRATEGY and BUSINESS PLANNING 6.1 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Update Lauren Anderson was invited to present the Board Assurance Framework, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • All risks had been reviewed by the relevant Executive Director(s) since the BAF was last presented to the Board, with an extensive review having been carried out in December 2023 and in April 2024. • Following review by the Finance and Investment Committee in August 2024, risk 5c had been modified to better reflect the Trust’s estates-related risks. • The NHS was designing a dynamic risk assessment framework. • Work was ongoing to compare the Care Quality Commission’s Well-Led framework with the Trust’s BAF, and to identify any gaps. Page 6 7. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, RISK and INTERNAL CONTROL 7.1 Register of Seals and Chair’s Actions Report The paper ‘Register of Seals and Chair’s Actions Report’ was presented to the meeting, the content of which was noted. Decision: The Board agreed to ratify the application of the Trust Seal to the documents listed in the ‘Register of Seals and Chair’s Actions Report’. 7.2 Health and Safety Annual Report 2023-24 Jane Fisher was invited to present the Health and Safety Annual Report for 2023/24, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • There continued to be a number of incidents of late reporting of work-related absence, although steps were being taken to streamline the process and to make reporting easier. • There had been a number of losses in staff over the year, which had impacted the FFP3 mask-fitting team in particular. • Improved training had been made available through the Virtual Learning Environment, and health and safety training received was now listed as a skill on staff members’ HealthRoster profile. • Thirty-nine incidents had been reported under the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR). • The main causes of injuries were as a result of collisions, slips, trips and falls, sharps, and incidents of violence and aggression. With the exception of the latter, these incidents were generally accidents or a result of human error, with nursing and healthcare assistants being the most likely groups to be injured. 7.3 People and Organisational Development Committee Terms of Reference It was noted that the People and Organisational Development Committee had reviewed its terms of reference at its meeting held on 21 August 2024. Decision: Following discussion, it was further noted that whilst the committee had proposed no changes to the terms of reference, it was agreed that the terms of reference should include specific reference to the CQC’s quality statements given the emphasis within the CQC’s latest framework on equality, diversity and inclusion related matters. 8. Any other business There was no other business. 9. Note the date of the next meeting: 5 November 2024 10. Items circulated to the Board for reading The item circulated to the Board for reading was noted. There being no further business, the meeting concluded. Page 7 11. Resolution regarding the Press, Public and Others Decision: The Board resolved that, as permitted by the National Health Service Act 2006 (as amended), the Trust’s Constitution and the Standing Orders of the board of directors, that representatives of the press, members of the public and others not invited to attend to the next part of the meeting be excluded due to the confidential nature of the business to be transacted. The meeting was adjourned. Page 8 List of action items Agenda item Assigned to Deadline Status Trust Board – Open Session 06/06/2024 5.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 1 1152. Digital Teape, Joe Explanation action item JT agreed to include Digital as an agenda item at a future Trust Board Study Session. 27/02/2025 Pending Update: Item tentatively scheduled for TBSS on 27/02/2025. Trust Board – Open Session 25/07/2024 5.4 Briefing from the Chair of the Quality Committee (Oral) 1163. Impact of technology Machell, Craig 27/02/2025 Pending Explanation action item Craig Machell agreed to add an item covering the impact of technology over the next 5-10 years to a future Trust Board Study Session agenda. Update: Item tentatively scheduled for 27/02/25 Study Session. Trust Board – Open Session 10/09/2024 5.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 4 1175. 'Red flag' staffing incidents Byrne, Gail Explanation action item Gail Byrne agreed to look into the increase in ‘red flag’ staffing incidents in July 2024. 05/11/2024 Pending Page 1 of 1 Agenda item 4.1 Committee Chair’s Report to the Trust Board of Directors 5 November 2024 Committee: Audit and Risk Committee Meeting Date: 14 October 2024 Key Messages: Assurance: (Reports/Papers reviewed by the Committee also appearing on the Board agenda) Any Other Matters: • The committee reviewed the year end process for 2023/24, and associated ‘lessons learned’. Many of the issues encountered ought to be mitigated by the introduction of a new finance system, together with a ‘rehearsal’ of the year end accounts process to be carried out early in 2025. • The Trust’s National Cost Collection submission for 2024 went well with no validation errors requiring re-submission and data quality was good. Whilst the output will be presented to the Finance and Investment Committee, initial indications were that the Trust was more efficient than the average. • The committee received an update on the Procurement Act 2023 and the potential impact on the Trust. It was noted that the additional reporting requirements had been delayed until February 2025 due to issues with the digital reporting platform development. • The committee received updates in respect of Information Governance and Legal. • The committee received an update on Data Quality, including work ongoing to review cancer waiting times data. • A report on a local proactive exercise in respect of Bank/Agency staff identity fraud showed that whilst the Trust was following the majority of the recommendations to reduce the risk of this type of fraud, current practice could be improved. The committee agreed with the report. 6.2 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Level of Assurance: Substantial • All risks had been reviewed with the relevant executive director(s). • It is intended that agenda items at Board meetings will be more clearly linked to the BAF risks. • In addition, division-level ‘BAFs’ are under consideration to provide a clearer idea of overall risk at the divisional level to bridge the gap between the operational risk register and Board-level BAF. • 90% of operational risks had been reviewed, an indicator of wellembedded risk management within the organisation. The Trust’s Fraud, Bribery & Corruption Annual Report 2023/24 highlighted no particular areas of concern. The committee reviewed the performance of the Trust’s internal and external auditors. In addition, the committee held a discussion with the external auditors without management present. Substantial Assurance Reasonable Assurance There is a robust series of suitably designed internal controls in place upon which the organisation relies to manage the risk of failure of the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process, which at the time of our review were being consistently applied. There is a series of controls in place, however there are potential risks that may not be sufficient to ensure that the individual objectives of the process are achieved in a continuous and effective manner. Improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks. Page 1 of 2 Limited Assurance No Assurance Not Applicable Controls in place are not sufficient to ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. There is a fundamental breakdown or absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of controls. Where assurance is not required and/or relevant. Page 2 of 2 Agenda item 4.2 Committee Chair’s Report to the Trust Board of Directors 5 November 2024 Committee: Finance and Investment Committee Meeting Date: 21 October 2024 Key Messages: • • • • • • The Trust has received significant additional cash in October 2024 through deficit support funding and additional payments for 2023/24 ERF performance. The Trust’s financial position remains challenging with a year-to-date deficit of £8m. The Always Improving programme continues to make progress, but will need to go further and faster. The Trust’s data centre arrangements remain a risk and design work is ongoing in respect of a solution. The risk associated with cyber incidents also remains high. The committee supported a business case for possible expansion of UHS Pharmacy Limited and recommends it to the Board. The committee reviewed the proposed financial recovery plan and recommends to the Board its submission to the ICB. The main risk to the achievement of the Trust’s 2024/25 plan remains the need for the ICS transformation programmes to deliver. Assurance: (Reports/Papers reviewed by the Committee also appearing on the Board agenda) 5.8 Finance Report for Month 6 Level of Assurance: Substantial • The Trust has received £11.2m of deficit support funding as well as £6.5m of additional funding in respect of 2023/24 Elective Recovery performance. • The year-to-date deficit is c.£8m, with an underlying deficit of c.£6m per month. • The Trust’s monthly income remains strong and ERF performance in September 2024 was 130%. However, costs are gradually increasing, and further investigation is required into pay expenditure. • The full amount of 2024/25 CIP has now been identified. • The most significant risk to the Trust’s achievement of its 2024/25 plan remains delivery of the system transformation programmes. 6.2 Board Assurance Framework Level of Assurance: Reasonable • Risks 5a, 5b and 5c have been updated, following discussions with the respective Executive Directors. • Risk 5a will be reassessed following the Trust’s self-assessment against the Recovery Support Programme undertakings to ensure that the risk rating and target are appropriate. • A new scoring framework is being developed to improve consistency in the rating of risks. Any Other Matters: The additional cash received in October 2024 means that it is now likely that the Trust will not need additional cash until February 2025, whereas this was previously expected to be the case in November 2024. The Trust has in place effective controls to monitor its cash position, and a regular report on cash will be provided to the Finance and Investment Committee. Page 1 of 2 Substantial Assurance Reasonable Assurance Limited Assurance No Assurance Not Applicable There is a robust series of suitably designed internal controls in place upon which the organisation relies to manage the risk of failure of the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process, which at the time of our review were being consistently applied. There is a series of controls in place, however there are potential risks that may not be sufficient to ensure that the individual objectives of the process are achieved in a continuous and effective manner. Improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks. Controls in place are not sufficient to ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. There is a fundamental breakdown or absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of controls. Where assurance is not required and/or relevant. Page 2 of 2 Agenda item 4.3 Committee Chair’s Report to the Trust Board of Directors 5 November 2024 Committee: People and Organisational Development Committee Meeting Date: 21 October 2024 Key Messages: Assurance: (Reports/Papers reviewed by the Committee also appearing on the Board agenda) Any Other Matters: • The Trust remains below its plan in terms of workforce numbers. However, from October 2024 onward, this position is expected to change. • The risk of non-delivery of ICS transformation programmes is significant. The Trust has assumed a significant reduction in workforce based on delivery of these schemes. • The committee examined the progress against actions designed to improve the lives of resident doctors. It was noted in particular that there was an issue with a lack of availability of office/desk space. • The Trust had been notified that Unite was commencing a ballot of its members commencing on 21 October 2024 as part of the ongoing dispute with porters. 5.11 People Report for Month 6 Level of Assurance: Substantial • The Trust was 249 WTE below its plan. However, this position was expected to change significantly with the onboarding of newly qualified nurses etc. in the autumn. • In addition, the Trust’s plan assumed that the ICS transformation programmes would begin to deliver significant reductions from October 2024 onward. • Turnover and sickness remain below target at 11.1% and 3.6% respectively. Bank and agency rates also remain low. • Appraisal rates remain low at 73%. The Trust was considering a move away from the current ESR system in order to make the appraisal process easier. The Trust had held constructive discussions with Unison as part of the Band 2/3 pay dispute. Substantial Assurance Reasonable Assurance Limited Assurance No Assurance Not Applicable There is a robust series of suitably designed internal controls in place upon which the organisation relies to manage the risk of failure of the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process, which at the time of our review were being consistently applied. There is a series of controls in place, however there are potential risks that may not be sufficient to ensure that the individual objectives of the process are achieved in a continuous and effective manner. Improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks. Controls in place are not sufficient to ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. There is a fundamental breakdown or absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of controls. Where assurance is not required and/or relevant. Page 1 of 1 Agenda item 4.4 Committee Chair’s Report to the Trust Board of Directors 5 November 2024 Committee: Quality Committee Meeting Date: 14 October 2024 Key Messages: Assurance: (Reports/Papers reviewed by the Committee also appearing on the Board agenda) Any Other Matters: • The Trust was making good progress against its 2024/25 Quality Priorities. • There were concerns regarding the consistency of approach to infection prevention and control in the Trust. Action plans were being produced and the ‘Fundamentals of Care’ programme is also intended to address many of these concerns. • A never event due to wrong site surgery had been recorded. This is the fifth never event reported during 2024. • The closure of Ward D4 had not been effective in eradicating the candida auris infection with four new cases reported. • There was insufficient resource to roll out National Safety Standard for Invasive Procedures (NatSSIPS) 2 in a comprehensive and systematic manner. • In its review of mental health work, the committee noted the following top three risks: lengths of wait for onward care; parity of esteem for patients; and the level of support from local mental health trusts. 6.2 Board Assurance Framework Level of Assurance: Reasonable • Risks 1a, 1b, 1c and 4a have been updated, following discussions with the respective Executive Directors. • It was agreed that the likelihood of achieving the target risk level for risk 1c (infection prevention and control) by April 2025 should be reviewed. • Staffing remains the main concern for the Trust’s Maternity services. • The possibility of support from Salisbury NHS FT to manage the increasing number of caesarean sections was being explored. Substantial Assurance Reasonable Assurance Limited Assurance No Assurance Not Applicable There is a robust series of suitably designed internal controls in place upon which the organisation relies to manage the risk of failure of the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process, which at the time of our review were being consistently applied. There is a series of controls in place, however there are potential risks that may not be sufficient to ensure that the individual objectives of the process are achieved in a continuous and effective manner. Improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls to mitigate these risks. Controls in place are not sufficient to ensure that the organisation can rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Significant improvements are required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of the controls. There is a fundamental breakdown or absence of core internal controls such that the organisation cannot rely upon them to manage the risks to the continuous and effective achievement of the objectives of the process. Immediate action is required to improve the adequacy and effectiveness of controls. Where assurance is not required and/or relevant. Page 1 of 1 Agenda item 4.5 Report to the Trust Board of Directors, 5 November 2024 Title: Sponsor: Author: Purpose Chief Executive Officer’s Report David French, Chief Executive Officer Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs (Re)Assurance Approval Ratification Information x Strategic Theme Outstanding patient outcomes, safety and experience Pioneering research and innovation World class people Integrated networks and collaboration Foundations for the future x x x x Executive Summary: The CEO’s Report this month covers the following matters: • Autumn Statement • Portering Dispute • BAM Dispute • Change NHS • Review into the Operational Effectiveness of the Care Quality Commission • Proposed Legislative Changes • New Hospital Programme – Hampshire Together • Hampshire and Isle of Wight Healthcare • Charity Priorities • Staff Survey • National Patient Safety Award Contents: Chief Executive Officer’s Report Risk(s): N/A Equality Impact Consideration: YES / NO / N/A Chief Executive Officer’s Report Autumn Statement On 30 October 2024, the Chancellor of the Exchequer presented her Autumn Statement. The statement was said to be based on the principles of restoring economic stability and increasing investment. A summary can be found from NHS Providers website: autumn-budget-2024-on-the-day-briefing.pdf The statement set out measures to raise an additional £40bn in taxation. This includes an increase in employer’s national insurance contributions by 1.2% to 15% from April 2025, increases in the rates of capital gains tax, changes to inheritance tax, abolition of the nondomicile tax regime, increased stamp duty on second homes, an increase in the rate of the windfall tax on energy companies, and removal of the VAT exemption for private schools. The Chancellor said that she would reduce wasteful spending and has set a 2% productivity savings target for all departments. The Government will publish its ten-year plan for the NHS in Spring 2025 and re-committed to reducing waiting times to 18 weeks by delivering on its manifesto commitment for 40,000 extra hospital appointments each week. The key announcements for health and care include: • Day-to-day spending for the Department of Health and Social Care will increase by £22.6bn from 2023/24 to 2025/26. This is a two-year average real terms NHS growth rate of 4% – the highest since 2010 (excluding the years affected by the COVID-19 pandemic). • Capital spending will increase by £3.1bn in 2025/26 (compared to 2023/24 outturn) – rising to £13.6bn. This is a two-year average real terms growth rate of 10.9%, although it is still lower than the overall value of the maintenance backlog (£13.8bn). This includes £1.5bn for new surgical hubs and diagnostics scanners, and £1bn towards backlog maintenance. There remains some uncertainty regarding the implications of the additional revenue funding and whether any of the funding announced will provide in-year relief in addition to values already confirmed as part of pay award and Elective Recovery Framework funding. Overall, the commitment to additional capital and revenue investment to the NHS is extremely welcome. We will assess the implications for HIOW ICS and to UHS over the coming weeks and months. The national proposed rise in the minimum wage to £12.21 in April 2025 will exceed the current lowest level within the NHS of £12.08. The national staff council will be working with NHS unions to review the implication of this and how it is addressed at a national level. Portering Dispute The Trust has been formally notified by UNITE the union that it has initiated a strike ballot of its members employed within the portering department at University Hospital Southampton. The ballot commenced on 21 October and will run until 11 November 2024. UNITE is balloting members on a range of issues including conduct, culture and working conditions. Prior to the ballot, and having been made aware of staff concerns, the Trust commissioned an independent external review, seeking views of all the portering department. The ballot has attracted media coverage from the BBC and some other local sources, and the Trust provided a response to the issues raised. The Trust is in active discussions with UNITE and local portering representatives to address the issues being raised and will continue to work constructively to resolve the dispute. Page 2 of 6 Meanwhile, the Trust is actively considering plans to ensure patient services and safety are maintained in the event a strike takes place. This will include enacting the Trust’s business continuity processes through the hospital incident management structure. The Board will be kept informed as plans are finalised and on conclusion of the ballot. BAM Dispute While the Trust was proceeding with the development of the east wing annex, concerns were raised by external structural engineers over the capacity of the existing building to cope with the expected additional weight the development would put on the existing structure. In 2022, the Trust raised a formal issue with BAM, the principal contractor of the existing east wing annex building. Over the last two years the Trust, with the support of DAC Beachcroft, has been trying to get BAM’s representatives to the mediation table to resolve the issues raised on the building. In September 2024, the decision was taken to commence arbitration proceedings against BAM Construction over the inability to agree to a mediator or mediation date. The Trust continues to work closely with DAC Beachcroft during this process, aiming for completion in early 2025. Change NHS On 21 October 2024, the Department for Health and Social Care launched an online portal for individuals to share their views, experiences and ideas to assist in the development of the Government’s 10 Year Health Plan. Staff and members of the public have been asked to: • Give their views on the NHS and health and care. • Tell the Government what they feel is working well and what needs improving. • Share their experiences. • Post their ideas for improving health and care in the future. More information can be found at: Change NHS: help build a health service fit for the future GOV.UK Review into the Operational Effectiveness of the Care Quality Commission On 15 October 2024, the Government published an independent report by Dr Penny Dash, who had been commissioned in May 2024 to review the operational effectiveness of the Care Quality Commission (CQC). The review heard from over 300 people from across the health and care sectors and within the CQC, and analysed the CQC’s performance data. The review found significant failings in the internal workings of the CQC, which have led to a substantial loss of credibility, a deterioration in the CQC’s ability to identify poor performance and support a drive to improve quality. The review summarised these failings as follows: • Poor operational performance – there has been a stark reduction in activity compared with 2019. • Significant challenges with the provider portal and regulatory platform. • Delays in producing reports and poor-quality reports. • Loss of credibility within the health and care sectors due to the loss of sector expertise and wider restructuring, resulting in lost opportunities for improvement. • Concerns around the single assessment framework and its application. • Lack of clarity regarding how ratings are calculated and concerning use of the outcome of previous inspections to calculate a current rating. • There are opportunities to improve the CQC’s assessment of local authority Health and Care Act 2022 duties. • ICS assessments are in early stages of development with a number of concerns shared. • The CQC could do more to support improvements in quality across the health and care sector. • There are opportunities to improve the sponsorship relationship between the CQC and the Department of Health and Social Care. Page 3 of 6 The full report can be read at: Review into the operational effectiveness of the Care Quality Commission: full report - GOV.UK Proposed Legislative Changes The Government has proposed a number of significant reforms to employment legislation through its Employment Rights Bill. These changes include: • From 2026, employees will have immediate entitlement to paternity leave, unpaid parental leave, and bereavement leave from the first day of employment. Protections for pregnant women and mothers will also be strengthened. • ‘Exploitative’ zero-hours contracts will be banned, giving workers the right to move to guaranteed hours contracts after a 12-week reference period.
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/2024-Trust-documents/Papers-Trust-Board-5-November-2024.pdf

Engaging for increased research participation - full report

Description: Engaging for increased research participation Public and healthcare professionals' perceptions For further information contact: Chris Stock Head of R&D communications and strategy University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust T: 07795506319 / E: christopher.stock@uhs.nhs.uk Ben Hickman Research director Alterline Research T: 01616050862 / E: ben.hickman@alterline.co.uk This report presents independent research funded in part by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Clinical Research Network: Wessex. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health. Contents 1. Executive summary 1.1. Headline findings and recommendations 1.1.1.People are positive about research and participation 1.1.2. The critical conversations are not happening 1.1.3 Healthcare professionals perceive major barriers to involvement 1.1.4 The public need information, of immediate relevance to their health 1.1.5 Time and fitting participation into life is a concern 2. Introduction and Methodology 2.1. Introduction 2.2. Key objectives 2.3. This report 2.4. Method 3. Review of the literature 3.1. General background 3.2. Why do people take part in clinical research? 3.3. What stops people from taking part in clinical research? 3.4. Why do people take part, or not take part, in related activities? 3.5. Summary 4. Likelihood to participate in clinical research 4.1. The public view clinical research as important 4.1.1. Demographic Differences 4.2. Few people have been asked to take part in clinical research 4.3. Likelihood to participate 4.3.1. Demographic differences 4.4. Likelihood to participate in various types of research 5. Motivations for taking part 5.1. Why do other people take part in clinical research? 5.2. What would motivate you to take part? 5.2.1. Demographic differences 5.3. Exploring motivations in more depth 6. Barriers to taking part 6.1. Why don't other people take part? 6.2. What stops you from taking part? 6.2.1. Demographic differences 6.3. Exploring barriers in more depth 6.4. What do people mean by the `risks' involved? 6.5. How are people forming opinions about risk? 6.6. What might reassure people? 7. The experience of taking part in clinical research 7.1.What motivated people to take part? 7.2. Would people recommend the experience? 7.3. Why would people recommend the experience? 7.4. Why would people not recommend the experience? 7.5. Knowing someone who has taken part 7.6. Why would people be more likely to take part, knowing someone who has? 7.7. Why would people be less likely to take part, having known someone who has? 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 11 12 12 12 14 15 15 16 18 18 18 19 19 22 22 22 24 24 26 27 28 29 29 29 29 31 31 31 32 Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 2 8. Knowledge and information 8.1. Level of understanding of clinical research 8.1.1. Demographic differences 8.2. Seeking information 8.3. What information would you need? 8.4. Media coverage 9. Healthcare professionals' perceptions of clinical research 9.1. What do healthcare professionals think of clinical research? 9.2. Who do they think are getting involved in research? 10. Motivations for getting involved in clinical research 10.1. What motivates healthcare professionals to get involved? 11. Barriers to getting involved in clinical research 11.1. What stops healthcare professionals from getting involved? 12. Research opportunities 12.1. Approaching healthcare professionals 12.2. Why are healthcare professionals approaching patients? 12.3. Why are healthcare professionals not approaching patients? 13. Availability of information 13.1. Awareness of clinical research 13.2. Finding information about clinical research 14. The future 14.1.What would make you more likely to get involved in research in the future? 14.2.What would make you more likely to get speak to patients the future? 15. Conclusions and recommendations 15.1. People are positive about research and participation 15.2. The critical conversations are not happening 15.2.1. Recommendation 1 15.3. Healthcare professionals perceive major barriers to involvement 15.3.1. Recommendation 2 15.4. The public need information, of immediate relevance to their health 15.4.1. Recommendation 3 15.5.Time and fitting participation into life is a concern 15.5.1. Recommendation 4 Appendix 1 ? Public survey demographics 33 33 33 34 34 35 37 37 38 39 39 41 41 43 43 44 44 45 45 46 47 47 48 49 49 49 49 49 49 50 50 50 51 52 Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 3 1. Executive summary See section 15 for summary findings and specific recommendations for increasing clinical research participation. 1.1.1 People are positive about research and participation The Wessex population views research in the NHS positively and a large proportion are open to participating: 90% of respondents think that it is important for the NHS to support research into new treatments, whilst 47% think it likely they would be willing to participate in clinical trials in the future. Those that have participated have positive perceptions, and they will likely have a significant influence on others' future participation: 80% of people who have taken part in clinical research would recommend taking part to a friend or family member, whilst around half (44%) of people who know someone who has taken part in clinical research said that they are more likely to participate now because of their experience. 1.1.2 The critical conversations are not happening Only 15% have had clinical research discussed with them by a healthcare professional in their lifetime, whilst only 5% of those who have seen healthcare professional in the last 12 months had clinical research discussed with them. Recommendation 1: Communications supporting participation in interventional trials should be focussed on enabling effective clinical conversations, with a reduced emphasis on broad public awareness approaches. 1.1.3 Healthcare professionals perceive major barriers to involvement The healthcare professionals interviewed were broadly positive about research; however they cite workload, time and lack of local trial information as constraints on discussion of research with patients. Better trial information was also identified as something that would increase the likelihood of discussing trial options with patients. Clinicians self-segregate themselves into `researchers' (an academically orientated minority) and `practitioners', with the latter positive about the benefits of clinical research and open to research referrals/facilitation but unlikely to have direct involvement in, or lead their own, research. Direct involvement in research by clinicians is limited by lack of programmed/sanctioned time within work plans, perceptions of excessive bureaucracy and lack of support. Recommendation 2: Local Clinical Research Networks, local research infrastructure and Trusts' senior leadership should support NHS clinicians' engagement with local clinical trials, and to explore management and education interventions to make communication with patients about trials a routine part of all NHS consultations. 1.1.4 The public need information, of immediate relevance to their health Public participation motivations centred on potential benefits to one's own health or that of close friends and family, whilst perceived risk of harm and receiving the `unknown' alongside concerns over time commitments and time off work were the biggest barriers to participation. Only 9% of respondents reported that they felt they understood clinical research very well, with this group the least likely to agree that risk was a significant barrier to participation. Generic online searches, condition-specific online sources of information and healthcare professionals were the primary sources of information, with a high degree of trust in the information provided by professionals. Recommendation 3: Public communications and engagement should have a greater emphasis on informing and empowering people at the point of care or enquiry, to enable discussion of trials with clinicians. Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 4 1.1.5 Time and fitting participation into life is a concern Concerns over time commitments needed to participate in studies, including taking time out of work and fitting such activity into daily/family life were significant barriers to participation. Recommendation 4: Changes to clinical research delivery to improve convenience and flexibility for participants, alongside interventions that lower the practical threshold to participation should be investigated and evaluated. Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 5 2. Introduction and Methodology 2.1 Introduction The partnership between University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (UHS) and the University of Southampton enables clinical-academics to perform clinical research through quality assured support, facilities and resources embedded at the heart of a major teaching hospital trust. This partnership hosts, and participates in the National Institute for Health Research Clinical Research Network Wessex (NIHR CRN:Wessex), one of 15 regional CRNs that coordinate and support clinical trial activity across the UK on behalf of the NIHR. Participation in clinical research by the public, patients and clinicians is essential to advancing medicine and care, and access to such trials is a right conferred to patients under the NHS constitution1. Because of this, recruitment to trials is the primary measure by which NIHR manages performance of CRNs and their member organisations. Rapid, complete recruitment to open trials remains challenging for Trusts and CRNs nationwide, indicating a significant issue relating to public and patient engagement with trial treatment options and research participation. Against this background UHS, with match-funding from NIHR CRN:Wessex, commissioned Alterline Research Ltd. to conduct a programme of market research to better understand the perceptions, motivations and barriers to participation in clinical research across the region. This research is intended to inform more effective communication and engagement aimed at increasing participation, primarily focussed on interventional clinical research. 2.2 Key objectives The research was conducted with three audiences: ? The public (18 years and older across all demographics and geographies) ? Primary care professionals including GPs and community nurses across the region. ? Hospital clinical staff including consultants, nurses, midwives and allied health professionals across the region's trusts. The research outputs are intended to provide an evidence base to help: ? ? ? ? Shape and inform effective engagement strategies with these audiences Build an evaluation framework against which engagement can be assessed and developed for greater efficacy Ensure coherence and commonality in engagement approaches and messages across Wessex Provide a reference point and baseline data for long-term tracking and evaluation. 2.3 This report This report details findings of the research with the public and healthcare professionals, exploring their attitudes towards clinical research, their likelihood to participate and the drivers and barriers to increasing participation and recommending actions for increasing research participation. > > > 1 NHS Constitution, 2013 http://www.nhs.uk/choiceintheNHS/Rightsandpledges/NHSConstitution/Documents/2013/the-nhs-constitution-forengland-2013.pdf Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 6 2.4 Method Review of literature and pilot A review of the existing literature was conducted to help inform the design of research materials including the quantitative and qualitative questionnaires. Quantitative questionnaire development A questionnaire comprising predominantly closed questions and a small number of open-ends was developed in partnership with the Trust. Quantitative public survey by telephone In total 1101 interviews were completed by telephone using specialist computer assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) software and an automated dialler system. The interview sample for the telephone survey was sourced from a specialist data provider using relevant postcodes. In order to ensure a representative survey sample of the Wessex population interview completions were monitored by key demographics such as gender, age and location. See appendix one for details of the demographic sample. Public depth survey Following the quantitative survey, key emerging themes were used develop a qualitative, in-depth survey which was administered by telephone. In total, 30 people took part in in-depth interviews including a mix of men and women, different ages and geographies. Clinician depth survey To explore perceptions, motivations and barriers of clinicians, an in-depth survey was designed and administered by telephone. In total, 25 healthcare professionals took part in the survey, including 6 GPs, 10 nurses, and 9 hospital consultants. Analysis The quantitative survey data was exported to SPSS (Statistical Packages for Social Sciences) where it was quality checked. Frequencies and cross-tabulations exploring differences between respondents were produced and key questions were charted and included in this report. Demographic differences have been included in this report following the application of tests of statistical significance. Open-ended data was themed, with key verbatim quotes pulled out and included in the report. The in-depth interviews were audio recorded and transcriptions were made. Key themes were identified from the focus group transcripts and representative verbatim quotes have been pulled out and included in the report. Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 7 3. Review of the literature 3.1 General background Clinical research is central to advancing medicine, developing and evaluating medications, treatments, and practices. The purpose of this review is to examine perceptions of clinical research, willingness to participate and motivations and barriers to taking part. As the research in the area is limited, it will also look at motivations and barriers to taking part in related, voluntary activities (i.e. giving blood and organ donation) in order to identify any commonalities. Generally, reports in the literature show support for clinical research to be high. The Wellcome Trust notes that 95% of adults and 93% of 13-18 year olds think that medical research should be supported2. Further 88% of those surveyed by the National Institutes of Health3 in the USA think that clinical trials are important for advancing knowledge about treating disease. A 2011 UK national survey of 990 adults by IPSOS-MORI, commissioned by the Association of Medical Research Charities, reported similarly strong public support for research with 97% believing the NHS should support research into new treatments, whilst 93% wanted their local NHS to be encouraged or required to support research. These figures are corroborated by a 2014 national survey of 3,000 adults commissioned by the National Institute for Health research, indicating that 95% of people said it was important to them that the NHS carries out clinical research4.5. Reported willingness to participate in research is also strong. In a monitor of people's views on science and research, 60% said they would be willing to take part in clinical trials6. 72% of those polled in the 2011 AMRC survey would want to be offered opportunities to be involved in trials of new medicines or treatments if they suffered from a health condition that affects their day-to-day life; 80% would consider allowing a researcher confidential access to their medical records, and 88% would be happy to be asked to talk to researchers about their family history or give a sample of their blood for laboratory testing. 89% of people surveyed in the 2014 NIHR national survey would be willing to take part in clinical research if they were diagnosed with a medical condition or disease, with only 3% saying they would not consider it at all5. Comis et al7 report that, in relation to cancer trials, 32% of adults would be willing to take part and 38% would potentially be interested, but would hold some reservations. Further, willingness to participate is not static and much depends on the nature of the trial. For example, 74% of people would be willing to allow access to their medical records, whereas only 30% would be willing to test a new drug2. These figures showing positive perception and willingness to participate are however in stark contrast to reported and actual participation rates. In two monitors by the Wellcome Trust, lifetime participation varied from 10%6 to 23%2, whilst a further 10% of people have a family member who has taken part6. These findings support National Institute for Health Research official figures indicating that annual recruitment to clinical trials in the English NHS stands at 0.94% of the English population (2013-14 figures)8, with CRN Wessex reporting recruitment of 1.15% of the regional population in the same period9. > > > Butt, S., Clery, E., Abeywardana, V., Phillips, M. (National Centre for Social Research). Wellcome Trust Monitor 1. London: Wellcome Trust; 2010 National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute. (1997). Results from Quarterly Omnibus Survey: Clinical Trials Questions-April 22, 1997. Bethesda: National Cancer Institute. 4 IPSOS-MORI / Association of Medical research Cahrities J11-02572 Public support for research in the NHS, http://www.ipsos-mori.com/ researchpublications/researcharchive/2811/Public-support-for-research-in-the-NHS.aspx 5 National Institute for Health Research, 2014, http://www.crn.nihr.ac.uk/blog/news/nine-out-of-ten-people-would-be-willing-to-take-part-inclinical-research/ 6 Clemence, M., Gilby, N., Shah, J., Swiecicka, J., Warren, D. (2013). Wellcome Trust Monitor Wave 2: Tracking public views on science, biomedical research and science education. London: Wellcome Trust. 7 Comis, R.L., Miller, J.D., Aldige, C.R., Krebs, L. and Stoval, E. (2003). Attitudes toward participation in cancer clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 21: 830-835. 2 3 Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 8 3.2 Why do people take part in clinical research? By far, the most reported reason for taking part in clinical research in the literature was a sense of altruism and helping others. Mattson et al10, found that 65% of participants took part for altruistic reasons. Rosenbaum et al11 noted that 46% of people who participated in clinical research reported altruism as the reasons for doing so. Of those people, just under half (45%) provided an altruistic reason as their only motivation. Those who gave altruistic reasons were more likely to have higher levels of social support, have a college education, and were less likely to say they had a disability. Specifically in cancer trials, altruism is often reported as a reason for taking part12. Jenkins et al13 report that 23% of those who consented to take part in clinical research did so because others would benefit from their participation. Many people also said that they took part because of healthcare professionals. Some report that this was because of a recommendation from their doctor3 and others report that it was through the doctor's influence that they decided to take part14. Jenkins et al13 looked solely at people who had decided to take part after being asked by their doctor. Of those who were asked, 72% decided to take part, of which 21% said it was because they trust their doctor. Further, it is apparent that some people also take part in clinical research because of the benefit that it will have to them. Such motivations include a hoping that there will be a therapeutic benefit or because there is no other treatment available12. Further, in Mattson et al10 74% of participants for aspirin and beta-blocker trials said they were motivated by non-altruistic motivations. These motivations included better medical monitoring and reassurance, physical improvement and preventions of further illness. 3.3 What stops people from taking part in clinical research? A concern about side effects and risks present a significant barrier to participation in the literature. Looking into cancer trials, a fear of making the cancer worse presented a significant barrier when being asked to participate15. Further, when testing a new drug, 93% of those with concerns in the Wellcome Trust study said they were worried about the possible risk to their own health from participating2. As with many factors, concerns about the side effects and risks of a trial are not stable across all groups. Basche et al16 spoke to seniors who were asked to participate in cancer trials. They found that those ages 65?75 were more likely to participate in the trial when the side effects were likely, than those aged over 75. Further, many studies report that issues related to the time commitment of clinical research and logistical difficulties also present a significant constraint on participation. A quarter of people asked about their attitudes to participation in clinical research said that they did not have the time to participate17. Further, a third of people in Basche et al16 said that they were concerned about the time commitment and other issues, such as getting to the trial facility. Many other barriers have been reported in the literature. These include: a dislike of randomisation13 and the potential to be in a placebo group; lack of knowledge of both the processes involved in clinical research19 and the trials that are available18, and a lack of trust in medical research19. > > > NIHR Clinical Research Network Annual Report 2013/14 http://www.crn.nihr.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/About%20the%20CRN/13_14%20Annual%20Performance%20Report_PUBLIC_FV.pdf 9 CRN Wessex Performance Report May2014, www.odp.nihr.ac.uk/default.htm 10 Mattson, M.E., Curb, J.D., and McArdle, R. (1985). Participation in a clinical trial: The patients' point of view. Controlled Clinical Trials. 6: 156-167 11 Rosenbaum, J.R., Wells, C.K., Viscoli, C.M., Brass, L.M., Kernan, W.N., and Horwitz, R.I. (2005). Altruism as a reason for participation in clinical trials was independently associated with adherence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 58: 1109-1114. 12 National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, Working Group on Enhancing Recruitment to Early Phase Cancer Clinical Trials. (2004). Enhancing Recruitment to Early Phase Cancer Clinical Trials: Literature Review. Bethesda: National Cancer Institute. 13 Jenkins, V. and Fallowfield, L. (2000). Reasons for accepting or declining to participate in randomised clinical trials for cancer therapy. British Journal of Cancer. 82(11): 1783-1788. 14 Chu, S.H., Jeong, S.H., Kim, E.J., Park, M.S., Park, K., Nam, M., Shim, J.Y., and Yoon, Y. (2012). The views of patients and healthy volunteers on participation in clinical trials: An exploratory survey study. Contemporary Clinical Trial. 33: 611-619 15 Solomon, M.J., Pager, C.K., Young, J.M., Roberts, R., and Butow, P. (2003). Patient entry into randomized controlled trials of colorectal cancer treatment: Factors influencing participation. Surgery. 133(6): 608-613. 16 Basche, M., Baron, A.E., Eckhardt, S.G., Balducci, L., Persky, M., Levin, A., Jackson, N., Zeng, C., Brna, P., and Steiner, J.F. (2008). Barriers to enrollement of elderly adults in early-phase cancer clinical trials. American Society of Clinical Oncology. 4(4): 162-168 8 Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 9 Although little literature looks into healthcare professionals' motivations regarding clinical research, several have looked at the barriers to getting involved. The research suggests that concerns for patients represent significant barriers to participation. In in-depth interviews with clinicians in South-west England, clinicians suggested that concerns for individual patients and respect for patients' preferences for different treatments prevented them from approaching patients and getting involved20. Further, concern for patients and a worry about the impact on the doctor-patient relationship was shown to be a significant barrier in Ross et al's meta-analysis21. 3.4 Why do people take part, or not take part, in related activities? Many reasons, both similar and dissimilar to those expressed above, are noted in the literature that motivate blood and organ donation. Coad et al22 found that those who knew someone who had donated or received an organ were more likely to agree with donating an organ to a family member or friend. Further, Wildman and Hollingsworth23 note that those who have donated blood before are more likely to donate again. Further, Cohen and Hoffner24 note that self-interest explains motivations to become an organ donor. 40% said they would be willing to sign a blood donor card. Self-interest motivations were the most important predictor of willingness to sign the card, including pride and satisfaction with the decision, otherwise known as the `warm glow' feeling. A questionnaire of university students in Japan showed that being in good health, having time to donate, being given opportunity to donate and helping others were the most important motivations for those who both had given blood before and those who had not25. The same study also looked at barriers to taking part. These were very much the opposite of the motivators, and included having time to donate, not knowing when and where to donate and not being given the opportunity to donate were considered barriers to taking part25. Lack of knowing where to go and it not being in a convenient place was corroborated by a further study of American adults, as well as a fear of needles and pain26. 3.5 Summary In summary, although many people believe that clinical research is important and are willing to take part, this is not reflected in rates of participation. Reasons why people take part in clinical research include altruism, the influence of a healthcare professional and a benefit to themselves. Major barriers to participation include the risk to themselves and time commitments. Clinician barriers generally revolve around a concern for their patients. Significantly different motivators and barriers to taking part in related activities include knowing someone who has taken part, taking part before and knowing what opportunities were available. > > > Bevan, E.G., Chee, L.C., McGhee, S.M. and McInnes, G.T. (1993). Patients' attitudes to participation in clinical trails. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology. 35(2): 204-207 18 Mills, E.J., Seely, D., Rachlis, B., Griffith, L., Wu, P., Wilson, K., Ellis, P., and Wright, J.R. (2006). Barriers to participation in clinical trials of cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review of patient-reported factors. Lancet Oncol. 7: 141-148 19 Lovato, L.C. and Kristin, H. (1997). Recruitment for controlled clinical trials: Literature summary and annotate bibliography. Controlled Clinical Trials. 18: 328-357 20 Langley, C., Gray, S., Selley, S., Bowie, C., and Price, C. (2000). Clinicians' attitudes to recruitment to randomised trials in cancer care: A qualitative study. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 5(3): 164-169 21 Ross, S., Grant, A., Counsell, C., Gillespie, W., Russell, I., and Prescott, R. (1999). Barriers to participation in randomised controlled trials: A systematic review. J Clin Epidemiol. 52(12): 1143-1156 22 Coad, L., Carter, N., and Ling, J. (2013). Attitudes of young adults from the UK towards organ donation and transplantation. Transplantation Research. 2: 9-14 23 Wildman, J., and Hollingsworth, B. (2009). Blood donation and the nature of altruism. Journal of Health Economics. 28: 492-503 24 Cohen, E.L. and Hoffner, C. (2012). Gifts of giving: The role of empathy and perceived benefits to others and self in young adults' decisions to become organ donors. Journal of Health Psychology. 18(1): 128-138 25 Ngoma, A.M., Goto, A., Yamazaki, S., Machida, M., Kanno, T., Nollet, K.E., Ohto, H. and Yasumura, S. (2013) Barriers and motivators to blood donation among university students in Japan: Development of a measurement tool. Vox Sanguinis 105(3): 219-224 26 Adelbert, J.B., Schreiber, G.B., Hillyer, C.D., and Shaz, B.H. (2013). Blood donations motivators and barriers: A descriptive study of African American and white voters. Transfusion and Aphresis Science. 48(1): 87-93 17 Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 10 4. Likelihood to participate in clinical research 4.1 The public view clinical research as important To provide a background to people's perceptions of clinical research, we asked respondents to tell us how important they thought it was for the NHS to support research into new treatments. As figure 1 below shows, the overwhelming majority of people (90%) think that it is either important or very important. However, of those who responded to the survey, only 10% have actually taken part in clinical research. There is a clear gap between how important the area is seen to be, and how many people are taking part. Figure 1 g1 How important do you think it is, if at all, for the NHS to support research into new treatments for patients? Base: 1101 3% 6% 13% 77% Very unimportant g3 unimportant Neither important nor unimportant Important Very important 4.1.1 Demographic Differences Age Belief that supporting research is important is lowest in 18-24 year olds (73%). As people get older, they are more likely to believe that it is important, peaking at 96% for 75-84 year olds. Gender Females (95%) a more likely to say supporting research is important than males (85%). Educational attainment Those who have qualifications other than a degree are the most likely to view research as important (97%). Those who have no educational qualifications are least likely (80%). Employment status Students (90%), retired people (83%) and those who are employed (76%) are more likely to see clinical research as important, compared to those who are self-employed (69%), home-makers (67%), or gout of work and not looking for work (55%). 7 Dependents Those with dependents (96%) are more likely to view clinical research as important than those without dependents (90%). Health Those with good (80%) or very good health (80%) are more likely than those with fair (70%) or very bad (54%) to view research as very important. Previous participation Those who have participated in clinical research (99%) are more likely to say supporting research is important than those who have not (89%). g8 Knowing someone who has taken part Those who know someone who has taken part in clinical research (97%) are more likely to see supporting research as important, compared to those who don't (89%). > > > Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 11 g7 g7 4.2 Few people have been asked to take part in clinical research g8 g8 Importantly, of those surveyed, only 15% recalled a time when a healthcare professional had discussed involvement in clinical research with them. Further, of the 43% who had seen a healthcare professional in the last month, only 5% had clinical research discussed with them (Figure 2, below). Figure 2 Did the healthcare professional you saw discuss involvement in clinical research with you? Base: 367 5% Do you recall a time at any point in your life when a healthcare professional has discussed clinical research with you? 15% Base: 799 Yes No 95% Yes No 85% Increasing the number of conversations taking place between clinicians and their patients about clinical research is likely to increase the number of people who take part. In the in-depth interviews, people often said they reason they had not taken part before was because no-one had ever asked. "I just haven't been asked." "No-one's ever asked me." Further, previous research has shown that trust in healthcare professionals is high, with 72% of adults saying that they trust a medical professional to provide them with information about clinical research27. This was also seen in the in-depth interviews, where many respondents expressed a great deal of trust for their doctor. "So if they said `blardy blardy blah', would you take part? Then I probably would have done, because we gained that much trust." g1 "Yes I would trust them if they talked about clinical research because the consultant I've been under for four years now, my GP I've known for over 20 years now so they're people that I've known long enough to trust." 4.3 Likelihood to participate Although only 10% of people have taken part in clinical research, the results would show appetite for participation is higher than this. When respondents were asked if they would consider taking part in clinical research, just under half (47%) agreed that they would be likely or very likely to (Figure 3, below). Figure 3 How likely is it that you would be willing to participate in clinical research in the future? g3 Base: 1101 15% 16% 22% 31% 16% Very unlikely 27 unlikely Neither likely nor unlikely likely Very likely Butt, S., Clery, E., Abeywardana, V., Phillips, M. (National Centre for Social Research). Wellcome Trust Monitor 1. London: Wellcome Trust; 2010 g7 > > > 12 Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 4.3.1 Demographic differences The demographic differences below explore whether some people are more likely than others to participate. Characteristics of people who are more likely to participate include: ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Having previously participated (64%) or knowing someone who has (63%) Having a good understanding of clinical research (63%) Students (58%) and those unable to work (63%) Having a degree or equivalent level of education (58%) Registered organ donors (58%) People in very good health (57%) People who do regular volunteer work (55%) People who have given blood (54%) People aged 35-64 (52%). Age People aged 35-64 (52%) are most likely to agree that they would be willing to take part in clinical research, this decreases amongst 25-34s (48%), 16-24s (46%), 65-74s (49%) and in particular 75-84s (32%) and 85+ (12%). Understanding of clinical research Those who have a very good understanding of clinical research (63%) are the most likely to say they would take part in clinical research, followed by those that have some (54%), little (40%) or none (39%). Previous participation Those who have participated before (68%) are more likely to say they would be willing to take part than those who have not (45%). Knowing someone who has taken part People who know someone who has participated in clinical research (63%) are more likely to say that they are willing to take part than those who don't (44%). Educational attainment Those with a degree or a degree equivalent (58%) and those who have other qualifications (52%) are more likely than those with no qualifications (35%) to say they would take part. Employment status Students (66%), those who are unable to work (62%), and those who are employed for wages (52%) are more likely to say they are willing to take part than those who are those who are retired (37%) and out of work and looking (26%). Volunteers Those who give help as a volunteer to clubs or organisations weekly (55%), monthly (53%) or occasionally (54%) are more likely to say they are willing take part than those have volunteered in the last year (46%) and those who give unpaid help on an individual basis (36%). Giving blood People who have previously given blood (54%) are more likely to say they would participate than those who have not given blood (45%). Organ donors Those who are registered as organ donors (58%) are more likely to say they would participate than those who are not (42%). Health Those who have very good (57%), good (49%) and bad health (47%) are more likely to say they are would take part than those who have very fair (35%) or bad health (32%). > > > Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 13 4.4 Likelihood to participate in various types of research To expand on people's likelihood to take part, we asked people about different scenarios they would be willing to take part in. As shown in Figure 4 (below), the scenarios that might improve their own health or care are those in which people were most willing to participate . Likelihood to participate extends to 61% in the scenario where it may help prolong a respondents' own life, or where it is looking at new forms of care and exercise to regain movement after a knee injury. In contrast, the scenarios which people were least willing to take part reflected those which were at earlier stages of the research process. This may be because research into new medications or treatments is seen as riskier. Figure 4 How likely is it you would be willing to take part in clinical research if...? Base: 1101 The study might help prolong or improve your life because you have a condition, significant illness or injury The study is looking at a new form of care and exercises to regain movement after knee injury The study is observing how your condition, illness or injury develops or responds to current treatments, over time The study is looking at how the way care is given affects you and your health (e.g. care at home versus staying in hospital) The study is looking at a new medical device 9% 6% 9% 9% 9% 10% 8% 11% 12% 11% 11% 9% 9% 11% 12% 15% 17% 18% 24% 19% 22% 23% 21% 23% 24% 22% 22% 40% 42% 43% 44% 44% 39% 39% 40% 39% 21% 19% 17% 15% 14% 17% 12% 9% 10% The study is looking at a treatment at a very advanced stage of development The study is looking for healthy volunteers The study is looking at a new vaccination The study is looking at a new drug The study is looking at a treatment in the very early stages of development 11% 19% 25% 35% 10% Very unlikely Unlikely Neither likely nor unlikely Likely Very likely Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 14 5. Motivations for taking part 5.1 Why do other people take part in clinical research? In order to understand what motivates people to take part in clinical research, we asked respondents to tell us what they thought motivated other people to take part. The most commonly cited reasons were: ? Helping others/altruism ? A positive impact on their own health ? A personal interest in a particular disease/condition. 5.2 What would motivate you to take part? To look into motivations further, we asked people what would motivate them (rather than others) to take part in clinical research. When people are speaking about their own motivations, they tend to agree more with statements which are related to personal motivations, i.e. helping to improve their own, or a close relative's, health. However, altruistic motivations are still important, with 72% agreeing that they would be motivated by helping others. Respondents also indicated that other things would motivate them, beyond those factors seen earlier. Knowing that aftercare would be available (67%) and an interest in a particular disease (67%) are both seen as important to respondents. Just 32% of respondents said that money would motivate them to take part. Figure 5 To what extent do you agree or disagree that the following would motivate you to take part in a clinical trial? Base: 1101 g5 Supporting research into a condition a close family member suffers from A positive impact on my own health Getting access to the latest treatments for a condition I have Helping others by helping to find new treatments Knowing that there would be continued aftercare and follow-up A personal interest in a particular disease / condition I would find the process of being involved interesting Money / financial gain 6% 5% 12% 6% 5% 6% 5% 6% 7% 7% 6% 7% 8% 8% 10% 13% 15% 15% 19% 17% 22% 36% 42% 48% 44% 51% 45% 44% 47% 15% 35% 28% 30% 21% 22% 23% 14% 25% 7% 17% Strongly disagree Disagree g6 Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree > > > Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 15 5.2.1 Demographic differences Understanding of clinical research Those who have no understanding of clinical research (58%) are the least likely to agree that they would be motivated by getting the latest access to treatment for a condition they have. Age 35-44 year olds (76%) are more likely to agree that they would be motivated by helping others by finding new treatments than 16-24 (70%) and 25-34 (64%) year olds. 34-44 (86%), 44-54 (85%) and 55-64 (84%) years olds are more likely to agree that they would be motivated by a positive impact on their own health than 16-24 (64%), 25-34 (70%) and 75-84 (64%) year olds. 35-44 (77%), 45-54 (80%) and 55-64 (78%) year olds are more likely to agree that they would be motivated by getting access to the latest treatment for a condition they have than 16-24 (64%), 25-34 (67%), 75-84 (70%) and 85+ (53%) year olds. Gender Women (80%) are more likely than men (75%) to agree that supporting research into a condition a close family member suffers from would motivate them to take part. Educational attainment Those with a degree of degree equivalent and those with other qualifications are more likely than those who have no qualifications to say they are motivated by helping others by helping to find new treatments, a positive impact on their own health, getting access to the latest treatment for a condition they have and supporting research into a condition a close family member suffers from. Employment status Students (90%) are more likely to agree that they are motivated by helping others by helping to find new treatments than those who are employed (76%), self-employed (70%), retired (66%) and out of work and looking (50%). Employed persons (77%) are more likely to be motived by getting access to the latest treatment for a condition they have than those who are retired (71%). Students (96%) are more likely than any other group to strongly agree that they are motivated by supporting research into a condition a close family member suffers from. 5.3 Exploring motivations in more depth When exploring what would motivate people to take part some clear themes emerged from both the open survey questions and the in-depth interviews,. The key motivations are summarised below. It would have a positive impact on my own health Many felt that they would be motivated to participate because it may have a positive impact on their own health. "I've got a few health problems so I would like to take part to see if there any treatments or information in regards to arthritis that would help me" "I have arthritis - anything new to improve life or find a cure." "Finding a drug that helps me." "If anybody could help me with my lifestyle and my health, I'm in a lot of pain, I'm overweight, so that would help." Although some people who responded did not currently suffer from a condition, they suggested they would be motivated to take part if they did and it would help that condition. "I still think the key motivation for me to do it would be if there was something detrimental to my health or something for my health and well-being to improve my lifestyle." "Of course I would, if I had a condition that required treatment and was offered something that would alleviate that." > > > Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 16 Further, some suggested that they would take part as a last resort if nothing else would help their condition. "If I had something that was as of yet untreatable I'd give it a go, but otherwise no." "If I was in an unfortunate situation of having a life threatening illness then I tend to think you grasp at anything." Altruistic motivations and helping the people around me A willingness to help with clinical research relating to a condition that those close to them suffer from was evident in people's responses. "Because my mother has dementia." "In recent years a lot of people I know have suffered from cancer and arthritis." "I suppose its family history, we have had a run in with cancer so I suppose we would be interested in getting involved." "My son's diabetic, anything that would help." Respondents also suggested that they were motivated by a more general altruistic sense of helping others. "Because I want to help people." "If it helps give people a better life." "It's being out there trying to help somebody that is unable to help themselves." It will help advance medical science Some respondents expressed that they would be likely to take part because it may help improve medicine and medical science. "Because it is interesting and it helps the process of medical science." "I feel if people don't participate then science will not advance, for everyone's benefit." "It is important to help the development of medicine and if people aren't helping then there would be no progress and it wouldn't get anywhere." I would find it interesting Respondents said that they would be motivated to take part in various types of trials because they found it interesting. "I find that really quite interesting, I quite like a bit of psychology myself, I'd like to see what goes on in their heads to make it go one way or the other." "Yeah that's a fascinating thing, it's just so clever!" "I'm quite interested in exercise and diet." "Because it would be interesting to see how your health can be affected by those types of things." > > > Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 17 Because I've taken part before Those who had already taken part in clinical research suggested they would again because of their previous experience. "Previous experience in a clinical trial." "Already have been part of a clinical trial for cancer. So far it is a beneficial experience." "I have already taken part and thought it helped." "I have previously been part of a clinical trial and had a good experience." Money Earning money through participating was a clear motivation for a minority of people. "Depending on what the cash incentive was. I wouldn't participate in it if there was no financial gain because of the dangers behind it." "It would depend what it was in aid of and if it was for money." "If there was a large pay out I would take part." Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 18 6. Barriers to taking part 6.1 Why don't other people take part? We also looked into the barriers to taking part in clinical research. When asked what may stop other people from taking part, respondents mentioned: ? Being worried about the risks ? Lack of knowledge/information ? Lack of time to be involved. 6.2 What stops you from taking part? In order to explore this further, respondents were asked what would stop them personally (rather than others) from taking part. Respondents' answers reflected concerns about the risks involved in clinical research, a lack of knowledge and information, and practical issues with time and having to take time off work. When prompted, it was clear that there were other issues which concerned respondents. For some, the involvement of private drug companies (33%) and stories they have seen in the media (31%) would stop them from taking part in clinical research. Figure 6 To what extent do you agree or disagree that the following would stop you from taking part in a clinical trial? Base: 1101 g6 I'm worried about the risks g5 4% 11% 8% 7% 10% 12% 10% 20% 24% 28% 27% 32% 19% 19% 19% 28% 25% 42% 32% 35% 32% 25% 25% 19% 16% 32% 46% 14% 15% 14% 10% 6% 8% 6% 6% 5% 5% I might need to take time off work I don't have time to participate I don't know enough about clinical trials The involvement of a private drug company Stories I have seen in the media I wouldn't pass the medical screening test 37% 32% 44% 34% 20% 34% My family and friends would disapprove I'm not the type of person the NHS want to participate in clinical trials My religious or moral beliefs 18% 12% 25% 17% 16% 11% 5% Strongly disagree Disagree g9 Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree > > > Engaging for increased research participation ? key findings and recommendations 19 6.2.1 Demographic differences Understanding of clinical research Those who have a very good understanding (41%) are the least likely to agree they are worried about the risks, rising with some understanding (55%), little understanding (60%) and no understanding (62%). Those who have no (50%) or little understanding (48%) are more likely to agree that they don't have the time to take part than those with some (40%) or very good understanding (37%). Age Those aged 85+ (70%) are the most likely to say that not knowing enough about clinical research stops them from taking part. Those ages 75-84 (43%) and 85+ (59%) are the most likely to think that they are not the type of people the NHS want to take part. Gender Women (62%) are more likely to say that a worry about the risks would stop them from participating than men (52%). Women (48%) are also more likely to worry about needing time of work than men (43%). Educational attainment Those with no qualifications are least likely to agree that they are worried about the risks of participating (50%), that they don't have the time to participate (39%), and that they may need to take time off work (33%). However, this group are the most likely to agree (27%) that they are not the type of person the NHS wants to participate. Employment status Those who are unable to work are least likely to agre
Url: /Media/Southampton-Clinical-Research/Marketresearch/Engaging-for-increased-research-participation-full-report-v2.pdf

Papers Trust Board 6 June 2024

Description: Date Time Location Chair Apologies Agenda Trust Board – Open Session 06/06/2024 9:00 - 13:00 Conference Room, Heartbeat/Microsoft Teams Jenni Douglas-Todd Diana Eccles, Tim Peachey (from 12:00) 1 Chair’s Welcome, Apologies and Declarations of Interest 9:00 Note apologies for absence, and to hear any declarations of interest relating to any item on the Agenda. 2 Patient Story The patient or staff story provides an opportunity for the Board to reflect on the experiences of patients and staff within the Trust and understand what the Trust could do better. 3 Minutes of Previous Meeting held on 28 March 2024 9:15 Approve the minutes of the previous meeting held on 28 March 2024 4 Matters Arising and Summary of Agreed Actions To discuss any matters arising from the minutes, and to agree on the status of any actions assigned at the previous meeting. 5 QUALITY, PERFORMANCE and FINANCE Quality includes: clinical effectiveness, patient safety, and patient experience 5.1 Briefing from the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee (Oral) 9:20 Keith Evans, Chair 5.2 Briefing from the Chair of the Finance and Investment Committee (Oral) 9:25 Dave Bennett, Chair 5.3 Briefing from the Chair of the People and Organisational Development 9:30 Committee (Oral) Jane Harwood, Chair 5.4 Briefing from the Chair of the Quality Committee (Oral) 9:35 Tim Peachey, Chair 5.5 Chief Executive Officer's Report 9:40 Receive and note the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer 5.6 Performance KPI Report for Month 1 10:00 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer 5.7 Finance Report for Month 1 10:30 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer 5.8 Break 10:45 5.9 People Report for Month 1 10:55 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Steve Harris, Chief People Officer 5.10 Infection Prevention and Control 2023-24 Annual Report 11:10 Receive and discuss Sponsor: Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer Attendees: Julian Sutton, Interim Lead Infection Control Director/Sue Dailly, Infection Prevention Matron 5.11 Learning from Deaths 2023-24 Quarter 4 Report 11:20 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer Attendee: Jenny Milner, Associate Director of Patient Experience 5.12 Freedom to Speak Up Report 11:30 Review and discuss the report Sponsor: Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer Attendee: Christine Mbabazi, Equality & Inclusion Adviser/Freedom to Speak Up Guardian 5.13 Fuller Inquiry Report 11:45 Receive and note the report Sponsor: David French, Chief Executive Officer Attendee: Gavin Hawkins, Divisional Director of Operations, Division B 6 STRATEGY and BUSINESS PLANNING 6.1 CRN Wessex 2023-24 Annual Performance Report 11:55 Receive and note the annual report Sponsor: Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer Attendee: Clare Rook, Chief Operating Officer, CRN: Wessex 6.2 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Update 12:10 Review and discuss the update Sponsor: Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer Attendees: Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary/Lauren Anderson, Corporate Governance and Risk Manager Page 2 7 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, RISK and INTERNAL CONTROL 7.1 Feedback from the Council of Governors' (CoG) Meeting 1 May 2024 12:25 (Oral) Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair 7.2 Register of Seals and Chair's Actions Report 12:30 Receive and ratify In compliance with the Trust Standing Orders, Financial Instructions, and the Scheme of Reservation and Delegation. Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair 8 Any other business 12:35 Raise any relevant or urgent matters that are not on the agenda 9 Note the date of the next meeting: 25 July 2024 10 Resolution regarding the Press, Public and Others Sponsor: Jenni Douglas-Todd, Trust Chair To agree, as permitted by the National Health Service Act 2006 (as amended), the Trust's Constitution and the Standing Orders of the Board of Directors, that representatives of the press, members of the public and others not invited to attend to the next part of the meeting be excluded due to the confidential nature of the business to be transacted. 11 Follow-up discussion with governors 12:45 Page 3 Minutes Trust Board – Open Session Date Time 28/03/2024 9:00 – 13:00 Location Chair Microsoft Teams Jenni Douglas-Todd (JD-T) Present Dave Bennett, NED (DB) Gail Byrne, Chief Nursing Officer (GB) Jenni Douglas-Todd, Chair (JD-T) Keith Evans, Deputy Chair and NED (KE) David French, Chief Executive Officer (DAF) Paul Grundy, Chief Medical Officer (PG) Steve Harris, Chief People Officer (SH) Jane Harwood, NED/Senior Independent Director (JH) Ian Howard, Chief Financial Officer (IH) Tim Peachey, NED (TP) Joe Teape, Chief Operating Officer (JT) In attendance Martin De Sousa, Director of Strategy and Partnerships (MDeS) Craig Machell, Associate Director of Corporate Affairs and Company Secretary (CM) Lauren Anderson, Corporate Governance and Risk Manager (LA) (item 6.1) Ceri Connor, Director of OD and Inclusion (CC) (item 4.12) Diana Hulbert, Guardian of Safe Working Hours and Emergency Department Consultant (DH) (item 4.14) Sophie Limb, HR Project Manager (SL) (item 4.12) 1 member of the public (item 5) 6 governors (observing) 5 members of staff (observing) 1 members of the public (observing) Apologies Diana Eccles, NED (DE) 1. Chair’s Welcome, Apologies and Declarations of Interest The Chair welcomed attendees to the meeting. There were no interests to declare in the business to be transacted at the meeting. It was noted that apologies had been received from Diana Eccles. The Chair provided an overview of her activities since February 2024, including visits to hospital departments, meetings with peers and other key stakeholders. 2. Minutes of the Previous Meeting held on 30 January 2024 The draft minutes tabled to the meeting were agreed to be an accurate record of the meeting held on 30 January 2024, subject to amending a reference to ‘radiology’ on page four to ‘radiotherapy’. 3. Matters Arising and Summary of Agreed Actions It was noted that all actions had been completed or were not yet due. Page 1 In terms of action 1102, the service was provided by NHS Blood and Transfusion, and funding had been removed. 4. QUALITY, PERFORMANCE and FINANCE 4.1 Briefing from the Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee The chair of the Audit and Risk Committee was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 18 March 2024. It was noted that: • The committee had reviewed the losses and special payments report and noted that although the individual size of each occurrence was not material, these instances nonetheless did have a significant impact on individual patients. • The committee reviewed the Board Assurance Framework (item 6.1). • The committee reviewed an internal audit report on data quality and noted that there were only some minor matters to address. In addition, there were no outstanding actions from previous reports. • The committee reviewed the internal audit plan for 2024/25, which would include examination of long waiters, the discharge process and rostering. • The external audit plan for the 2023/24 financial year was agreed. 4.2 Briefing from the Chair of the Charitable Funds Committee Steve Harris was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 27 March 2024. It was noted that: • The charity was in a position to transfer to the new charitable company. • Gail Byrne would be appointed as a director of the new charitable company on a temporary basis to represent the Trust. • The annual report and accounts for 2023/24 would be the final item of business requiring Board approval. 4.3 Briefing from the Chair of the Finance and Investment Committee The chair of the Finance and Investment Committee was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 25 March 2024. It was noted that: • The committee reviewed the Finance Report for Month 11 (item 4.10) and the planning for 2024/25, noting that the underlying position presented a challenge for 2024/25. • The committee reviewed the Trust’s productivity assessed against that in 2018/19. The NHS England formula showed a 18% decline in the Trust’s performance. However, the basis of the formula was open to debate and the perception in the organisation was different given the demands on the Trust’s capacity. The Trust’s modified formula showed a lower decline in productivity and work was ongoing with the central team. • The committee reviewed the maintenance requirements in the Trust’s estate, which were significant owing to its age. • The committee reviewed the proposed capital prioritisation for 2024/25 and 2025/26. 4.4 Briefing from the Chair of the People and Organisational Development Committee The chair of the People and Organisational Development Committee was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 20 March 2024. It was noted that: • The committee reviewed the People Report for Month 11 (item 4.11) and noted that the additional recruitment controls were having an impact. Page 2 • The committee reviewed the Staff Survey results (item 4.12), noting that key themes were staff burnout and morale. 4.5 Briefing from the Chair of the Quality Committee The chair of the Quality Committee was invited to provide an overview of the meeting held on 18 March 2024. It was noted that: • The committee reviewed the patient safety and experience reports for the third quarter and noted some concerns regarding infection prevention control and pressure ulcers. In addition, there was some concern about overcrowding in the resuscitation area. • The committee had carried out a thematic review of never events, especially in Dermatology. • The committee reviewed the Trust’s performance in terms of its quality priorities for 2023/24. The Trust had achieved all its objectives, except one, which had been partially achieved. It was intended that there would be eight quality priorities in 2024/25. • It had been confirmed that the Integrated Care Board would fund the tobacco dependency programme in 2024/25. • Work was also taking place to provide additional capacity in the Paediatric Intensive Care Unit. 4.6 Chief Executive Officer’s Report David French was invited to present the Chief Executive Officer’s Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Hampshire and Isle of Wight Integrated Care Board (HIOW ICB) had launched a consultation on how it will re-shape itself for the future. The ICB had been required to reduce its running costs by 20% during 2024/25 and by a further 10% during 2025/26. • Junior doctors had voted to continue industrial action for a further six months. • In the Spring Budget, the Chancellor announced additional funding for the NHS, although, once inflation had been taken into account, the NHS budget would remain broadly flat. • The NHS England Workforce Race Equality Standard data report showed some improvements, but further work was required. • Steve Brine, the Member of Parliament for Winchester and Chandler’s Ford had been hosted by the Trust on a visit the week before. This afforded an opportunity to discuss the Hampshire County Council consultation, social care and non-criteria to reside. • The latest NHS patient survey showed a reduction in satisfaction, but this was largely due to waiting to get into the system. • There was significant pressure from NHS England for trusts to achieve the targets set. The Trust has demonstrated strong performance during 2023/24 across the six targets. • A nurse from the Trust has received a national recognition award based on their work on the ‘Diabasics’ initiative and the first episode of ‘Surgeons at the Edge of Life’, filmed at Southampton General Hospital, had been broadcast on BBC2. • Thanks were expressed to all staff for their performance during the year. 4.7 Performance KPI Report for Month 11 Joe Teape was invited to present the Performance KPI Report for Month 11, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • In terms of the Trust’s performance compared with comparators, the Trust was top quartile for the majority of indicators and top half for others. Page 3 • There were 19 patients who would breach the 78-week wait target at year end, 18 of which were corneal patients where materials were unavailable. It was noted that there was a national shortage of materials. • There were expected to be about 50 breaches of the 65-week wait target, of which around 30 were corneal patients. • The Trust had achieved diagnostic performance of 92% achieving the sixweek target. • There had been high volumes of patients in the Emergency Department during February and March 2024. However, the Trust had achieved 70.6% for type 1 performance and expected to achieve the 76% target by the end of March 2024. • The Trust’s Referral To Treatment metric was beginning to improve and there were some examples of very good waiting list management in Trauma and Orthopaedics and in Women and New Born. • The key point to emphasise was that, although it might not seem so at times, the Trust was out-performing most other comparable organisations. It was considered appropriate that staff communications should be worked on to reinforce this message. In terms of the Trust’s Key Performance Indicators: • The Quality Committee had seen significant improvements in diagnostic performance. • The two-week wait cancer target performance had also improved since April 2023. • Unfortunately, due to significant challenges with flow, overnight ward move performance had dropped significantly during the month, leading to poor patient experience. • In addition, the rate of pressure ulcers appeared to be increasing. 4.8 Non-Criteria to Reside Spotlight Report Joe Teape was invited to present the Non-Criteria to Reside Spotlight Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • Management of non-criteria to reside patients was one of the Trust’s biggest risks in terms of its operational and financial performance and achievement of its targets. • The Trust has seen 20%+ of beds occupied by patients without criteria to reside, which significantly impacted patient flow in the Emergency Department and has led to ambulance handover delays. • In addition, stays in hospital of longer duration were known to lead to worse patient outcomes. • The Trust was unable to have a significant impact on this issue, as the main driver was insufficient funding availability in local authorities. • In terms of what the Trust could do, work was ongoing to improve the discharge process by having conversations about care needs early on as part of the Trust’s flow transformation programme. 4.9 Break 4.10 Finance Report for Month 11 Ian Howard was invited to present the Finance Report for Month 11, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: Page 4 • The Trust had received £24.6m of cash support from NHS England and £5m in funding in relation to the impact of industrial action between December 2023 and February 2024. • A year-end deficit of £1.4m was forecast. • The Trust’s underlying monthly deficit was currently £4m, and the Trust’s underlying deficit had been £4-5m a month during 2023/24. • Cost Improvement Programme delivery was expected to be £62m at year end, an increase of £17m compared to the previous year. 4.11 People Report for Month 11 Steve Harris was invited to present the People Report for Month 11, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • Total workforce had reduced by 20 whole-time equivalents (WTE) during the month, although the Trust remained 266 WTE above plan. • Use of bank staff had reduced, although it was expected that more bank staff would be used in March 2024 as substantive staff used leftover annual leave before year end. • Average turnover was 11%, below the target of 13.6%. The Board discussed the report and noted that it was necessary to review training expectations in order to make best use of staff time. In addition, it was noted that funding for internationally recruited nurses was likely to reduce and that apprentice and student nurse numbers had reduced. 4.12 UHS Staff Survey Results 2023 Report Ceri Connor, Sophie Limb and Steve Harris were invited to present the UHS Staff Survey Results 2023 Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust scored above average in all of the People Promise areas and there had been an improvement in the areas regarding managers and appraisals. • However, the overall NHS average had increased, thus narrowing the gap. • The participation rate was lower than in the previous year and the overall scores hid pockets of concern. The Board discussed the results of the Staff Survey. It was noted in particular that the Trust had invested significant sums into wellbeing, but that morale was low. It was considered that this demonstrated the importance of local management to staff morale. In addition, the Board discussed the impact of the change in approach from granting significant autonomy during the pandemic to increasing levels of control, which had been received negatively by staff. However, it was noted that, whilst in some areas, such as with regard to patients, there was a general culture of accountability, there appeared to be less of a general culture of accountability with respect to finances and budgets. The possibility of ‘earned’ autonomy was considered as a means of mitigating against those who had acted properly being penalised by the actions of others. Page 5 4.13 Maternity and Neonatal Perinatal Quality Surveillance Dashboard Report The Maternity and Neonatal Perinatal Quality Surveillance Dashboard Report was noted. It was further noted that the additional information in respect of post-partum haemorrhage data (action 1101) was contained within the report and had been discussed at a maternity safety champions’ meeting. 4.14 Guardian of Safe Working Hours Quarterly Report Diana Hulbert was invited to present the Guardian of Safe Working Hours Quarterly Report, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • There had been seven exception reports constituting a breach and resulting in a financial penalty, which were due to exceeding the maximum 13-hour shift duration. All reports were from General Surgery. • There were also concerns in Gynaecology due to the complicated rotas, inadequate rest provision and facilities. • The position of a junior doctor was a difficult one due to a lack of patient contact during the pandemic, industrial action and changes in the assignment of foundation posts. Action: Paul Grundy and Diana Hulbert agreed to include an item regarding junior doctors on a future Trust Board Study Session agenda. 5. Patient Story David Livermore was invited to relate his experience of attending an appointment at the Eye Unit in October 2023 and, in particular, the difficulties he encountered as a wheelchair user. It was noted that his treatment had been carried out in a room inappropriate for his needs and that he had been asked personal questions in the waiting room. Following discussion with the Board of his experiences, David Livermore offered his services to the Trust to advise on disability access as an ‘expert patient’. 6. STRATEGY and BUSINESS PLANNING 6.1 Board Assurance Framework (BAF) Update Lauren Anderson was invited to present the Board Assurance Framework (BAF) update, the content of which was noted. It was further noted that: • The Trust’s Risk Management Policy and Strategy had been updated, with the main changes being in relation to the Trust’s risk appetite following the Trust Board Study Session held in December 2023. • Work was being carried out to improve the Board’s visibility of operational risks and to improve links between operational risks and the BAF. Page 6 7. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE, RISK and INTERNAL CONTROL 7.1 Register of Seals and Chair’s Actions Report The paper ‘Register of Seals and Chair’s Actions Report’ was presented to the meeting, the content of which was noted. Decision: The Board agreed to ratify the application of the Trust Seal to the documents listed in the ‘Register of Seals and Chair’s Actions Report’. 7.2 Remuneration and Appointment Committee Terms of Reference It was noted that the Remuneration and Appointment Committee had reviewed its terms of reference at its meeting held on 28 March 2024. It was further noted that some minor changes were proposed, largely to update references to documentation and NHS organisations, and, in terms of the executive pay guidance, to better reflect current practice and the available frameworks. Decision: Having reviewed the Remuneration and Appointment Committee terms of reference tabled to the meeting, it was agreed to approve these terms of reference. 8. Any other business There was no other business. 9. Note the date of the next meeting: 6 June 2024 10. Resolution regarding the Press, Public and Others Decision: The Board resolved that, as permitted by the National Health Service Act 2006 (as amended), the Trust’s Constitution and the Standing Orders of the board of directors, that representatives of the press, members of the public and others not invited to attend to the next part of the meeting be excluded due to the confidential nature of the business to be transacted. The meeting was adjourned. Page 7 List of action items Agenda item Assigned to Deadline Status Trust Board – Open Session 28/03/2024 4.14 Guardian of Safe Working Hours Quarterly Report 1127. Junior Doctors Grundy, Paul Hulbert, Diana 27/06/2024 Pending Explanation action item Paul Grundy and Diana Hulbert agreed to include an item regarding junior doctors on a future Trust Board Study Session agenda. Page 1 of 1 Report to the Trust Board of Directors Title: Agenda item: Sponsor: Date: Purpose: Issue to be addressed: Response to the issue: Chief Executive Officer’s Report 5.5 David French, Chief Executive Officer 6 June 2024 Assurance Approval or reassurance Ratification Information X My report this month covers updates on the following items: • Infected Blood Inquiry • General Election • Industrial Action • HEFMA Award • Capital Funding • 2024/25 Planning The response to each of these issues is covered in the report. Implications: Any implications of these issues are covered in the report. (Clinical, Organisational, Governance, Legal?) Summary: Conclusion The Board is asked to note the report. and/or recommendation Page 1 of 9 Infected Blood Inquiry On 20 May 2024, the Infected Blood Inquiry published its report into more than 30,000 people becoming infected with HIV and hepatitis C after being given contaminated blood products in the 1970s and 1980s. The report said that: • Too little was done to stop importing blood products from abroad, which used blood from high- risk donors such as prisoners and drug addicts; • In the UK, blood donations were accepted from high-risk groups until 1986; • Blood products were not heat treated to eliminate HIV until the end of 1985, although the risks were known in 1982; and • There was too little testing to reduce the risk of hepatitis from the 1970s onwards. The UK Government has established a compensation scheme for those impacted. The report can be read at: http://www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/reports NHS England’s formal response to the report is attached as Appendix 1. During the Inquiry, the Trust was made aware of patient cases which would be cited in the report and was offered an opportunity to comment. We chose not to comment in detail on individual cases, primarily due to the time elapsed since they happened. NHS England has commissioned an ongoing patient support service for those affected and it is likely that UHS will be one of two providers in the region offering this service. Funding for a fiveyear period has been confirmed. General Election The Prime Minister has announced that a general election will be held on 4 July 2024. There are a number of practical implications for the Trust as a public body to maintain political impartiality and to ensure that public resources are not used for the purposes of political parties or campaign groups during the pre-election period which commenced on 25 May 2024 and will continue until the day after the election. During this period, the following key principles should apply: • No activity should be undertaken which could be considered politically controversial or influential. • NHS trusts have discretion in their approach, but must be able to demonstrate the same approach for every political party, official candidate and designated campaign group. • The NHS may be under media spotlight, locally and nationally, so it is advisable to have a plan in place for how the organisation will manage the pre-election period and the potential for the organisation to be singled out in the media. Normal business and regulation needs to continue during the pre-election period. However, where a board meeting needs to take place, the agenda should be confined to those matters requiring a board decision or oversight. Matters of future strategy or future deployment of resources may be construed as favouring one party over another and should be avoided. Use of the confidential part of the agenda to discuss matters which may be politically controversial is not recommended. Care should be taken not to comment on the policies of political parties or campaign groups. Page 2 of 9 Organisations should not start long-term initiatives or undertake major publicity campaigns unless time critical (such as a public health emergency). Public consultations should not be launched during the pre-election period, and it is advisable to extend the period for those already running to take into account the pre-election period. The timing of the election means that formal Secretary of State approval for the Solent / Southern transaction is unlikely to happen before the election and therefore the formation of the new Trust, previously scheduled for 1 June, is likely to be delayed. Industrial Action On 29 May 2024, it was announced that junior doctors would stage a five-day strike, commencing on 27 June 2024 and ending on 2 July 2024. This will be the eleventh walkout by junior doctors since March 2023. As during previous periods of industrial action, the Trust will seek to minimise any impact on patient care by organising consultant cover wherever possible. HEFMA Award Paula Melhuish, Deputy Director of Estates and Capital Development, received the Outstanding Service Award from the Health Estates and Facilities Management Association on 13 May 2024. Paula has been a long-serving and esteemed colleague at UHS and has recently announced her retirement. Capital Funding Due to its Emergency Department performance at the end of 2023/24, the Trust was awarded an additional £2m in capital departmental expenditure limit (CDEL) as part of a scheme to reward high-performing trusts. There were several categories where the top-10 performing trusts received additional CDEL, including absolute ED 4-hour % performance and most improved ED 4-hour performance. NHS England agreed that the type 3 Urgent Treatment Centre attendances at RSH and Lymington should be included in the overall UHS performance and that, combined with significantly improved 4-hour performance at SGH, this meant that UHS was in the national top-10 for absolute ED 4-hour performance. terms of using the CDEL allowance, plans are being developed to increase the department’s same day emergency care (SDEC) capacity. The additional CDEL is not cash-backed so we are in discussions with NHSE regarding the cash funding. 2024/25 Planning The CFO and I will update the Board on the status of the 2024/25 planning round which is not yet finalised. At a meeting in London with NHS England executives, the ICS was asked to improve its position further in return for some financial incentives. This challenge was accepted, although the allocation of this further stretch to individual providers has not yet been agreed. The structure and leadership of the ICS-wide transformation programmes has been reviewed and changed. The structure of the programmes was considered by CEO, Chairs and ICB colleagues and it was agreed there should be six programmes for 2024/25, as set out below. The Board should note that I requested to retain the leadership role on the Planned Care programme, mostly because we have an agreed way forward, have good traction and can now see improvement happening. In addition, I was asked to take on leadership of the Workforce programme which, following discussion with the Chair, I have agreed to do. Page 3 of 9 Programme Mental Health Discharge Urgent and Emergency Care Local Care Planned Care Workforce CEO lead Ron Shields, SHFT Penny Emerit, PHU David Eltringham, SCAS Alex Whitfield, HHFT David French, UHS David French, UHS Each programme has been asked to set out its objectives and deliverables for the year ahead by 18 June 2024. I will share the results of this exercise with the Board in due course. Page 4 of 9 Appendix 1 Classification: Official To: • All integrated care boards and NHS trusts: - chairs - chief executives - medical directors - chief nurses - chief operating officers - chief people officers - heads of primary care - directors of medical education • Primary care networks: - clinical directors cc. • NHS England regions: - directors - chief nurses - medical directors - directors of primary care and community services - directors of commissioning - workforce leads - regional heads of nursing - regional heads of communications NHS England Wellington House 133-155 Waterloo Road London SE1 8UG 20 May 2024 Dear colleagues, Publication of the Infected Blood Inquiry final report Earlier today, the Infected Blood Inquiry published its final report at: www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/reports. The Prime Minister has subsequently issued an apology on behalf of successive Governments and the entire British state. On behalf of the NHS in England, now and over previous decades, Amanda Pritchard issued a public apology, saying: Publication reference: PRN01368 Page 5 of 9 “Today’s report brings to an end a long fight for answers and understanding that those people who were infected and their families, should never have had to face. “We owe it to all those affected by this scandal, and to the thorough work of the Inquiry team and those who have contributed, to take the necessary time now to fully understand the report’s conclusions and recommendations. “However, what is already very clear is that tens of thousands of people put their trust in the care they got from the NHS over many years, and they were badly let down. “I therefore offer my deepest and heartfelt apologies for the role the NHS played in the suffering and the loss of all those infected and affected. “In particular, I want to say sorry not just for the actions which led to life-altering and lifelimiting illness, but also for the failures to clearly communicate, investigate and mitigate risks to patients from transfusions and treatments; for a collective lack of openness and willingness to listen, that denied patients and families the answers and support they needed; and for the stigma that many experienced in the health service when they most needed support. “I also want to recognise the pain that some of our staff will have experienced when it became clear that the blood products many of them used in good faith may have harmed people they cared for. “I know that the apologies I can offer now do not begin to do justice to the scale of personal tragedy set out in this report, but we are committed to demonstrating this in our actions as we respond to its recommendations.” The report is sobering reading, documenting failings over multiple decades, and making recommendations across a wide range of areas, including recognition, support and compensation; education and training; monitoring of and testing for Hepatitis C; the safety of blood transfusions; preventing future harm, via duty of candour and regulation; as well as giving patients a voice. We write now to set out the initial steps we are taking in response. Support for those affected The Department of Health and Social Care is providing £19 million over five years to provide a bespoke Infected Blood Psychological Support Service which is expected to be rolled out later this summer. We have listened to the experiences of those involved, including patients, their families and staff, and are working with them to design and develop this service, which will provide dedicated support for those affected, located around the country. Copyright © NHS England 2024 2 Page 6 of 9 This service will include talking therapies, peer support, and psychosocial support, as well as access to other treatments or support for physical or mental health needs where appropriate. In the interim, the existing England Infected Blood Support Service remains available here: www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/england-infected-blood-support-scheme. Further information about existing testing and support services, including those commissioned by the Government, can be found at: www.nhs.uk/infected-blood-support. Supporting affected staff It is important to also recognise that some of our colleagues may be affected by the publication of today’s report in some way, whether through personal or professional connection to the issue. Employers may therefore wish to increase promotion of their local health and wellbeing support for staff. Details of nationally-commissioned routes of support, including the 24/7 text helpline Shout and NHS Practitioner Health, can be found at NHS England - Support available for our NHS People. Continuing to find and treat people with blood-borne viruses Although it is likely that the majority of those who were directly affected have now been identified and started appropriate treatment given the time that has elapsed since the last use of infected blood products, there may be people who have not yet been identified, particularly where they are living with asymptomatic Hepatitis C. We ask that systems continue to work with partners, including community groups and charities, as well as Hepatitis C Operational Delivery Networks, to promote local testing options for anyone at risk, or anyone who is concerned. This should include promotion of the new national service for at-home Hepatitis C self-testing kits, available via hepctest.nhs.uk. For those who are concerned about the risk of HIV infection, further information can be found here: information on HIV diagnosis and the HIV testing services search tool. Hepatitis B, another infection that can be linked to infected blood, usually clears up on its own without treatment; however, people concerned about Hepatitis B infection should be directed towards relevant hepatitis B information or their local sexual health clinic or GP practice. Today's report highlights that in some cases those affected by infected blood products were told of their diagnosis in ways which were insensitive and inappropriate. We would therefore ask you to ensure that patients and their families are supported through the process of receiving test results – of whatever kind - in a compassionate and considerate way. Copyright © NHS England 2024 3 Page 7 of 9 Ensuring patients can access the right information. We recognise following the publication of this report, some patients may raise questions directly with their primary and/or secondary care teams, or through other points of contact with the NHS. We will be sharing materials with relevant service providers to ensure frontline clinicians and other colleagues in patient-facing roles are able to provide appropriate information or signposting. We expect that this will be particularly relevant to: • Providers of NHS 111 services • GP practices and community pharmacies • Trusts providing services where blood products are used • Mental health providers Maintaining confidence in current blood and blood products and related treatment The infected blood and blood products that have been the subject of this Inquiry were withdrawn in 1991. In the intervening decades, comprehensive systems have been put in place to ensure the safety of both donors and recipients of blood and blood-derived products. Today, blood and blood products are distributed to NHS hospitals by NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT), which was established in 2005 to provide a national blood and transplantation service to the NHS. NHSBT’s services follow strict guidelines and testing to protect both donors and patients. NHS Blood and Transplant has published clear information about these processes here: Infected Blood Inquiry - NHS Blood and Transplant (nhsbt.nhs.uk). Nationally, NHS England will work with NHS Blood and Transplant and others to communicate the safety of current blood products. Assessing further recommendations and next steps As set out above, the final Inquiry report includes a number of important recommendations for the NHS. NHS England will be considering these in detail alongside the Department for Health and Social Care and other relevant bodies. In addition, an Extraordinary Clinical Reference Group is being convened to inform any immediate actions which should be taken. The next steps from this work will be shared as soon as possible, including through relevant clinical networks. Copyright © NHS England 2024 4 Page 8 of 9 Yours sincerely, Amanda Pritchard NHS Chief Executive NHS England Professor Sir Stephen Powis National Medical Director NHS England Dame Ruth May Chief Nursing Officer England Dr Emily Lawson DBE Chief Operating Officer NHS England Copyright © NHS England 2024 5 Page 9 of 9 Report to the Trust Board of Directors Title: Agenda item: Sponsor: Author Date: Purpose Issue to be addressed: Performance KPI Report 2024-25 Month 1 5.6 David French, Chief Executive Sam Dale, Associate Director of Data and Analytics 6 June 2024 Assurance or reassurance Y Approval Ratification Information The report aims to provide assurance: • Regarding the successful implementation of our strategy. • That the care we provide is safe, caring, effective, responsive, and well led. Response to the issue: The Performance KPI Report reflects the current operating environment and is aligned with our strategy. Implications: (Clinical, Organisational, Governance, Legal?) Risks: (Top 3) of carrying out the change / or not: Summary: Conclusion and/or recommendation This report covers a broad range of trust performance metrics. It is intended to assist the Board in assuring that the Trust meets regulatory requirements and corporate objectives. This report is provided for the purpose of assurance. This report is provided for the purpose of assurance. Page 1 of 24 Report to Trust Board in June 2024 Performance KPI Board Report Covering up to April 2024 Sponsor – David French, Chief Executive Officer Author – Sam Dale, Associate Director of Data and Analytics Page 2 of 24 Report to Trust Board in June 2024 Report guide Chart type Example Cumulative Column Cumulative Column Year on Year Line Benchmarked Line & bar Benchmarked Control Chart Variance from Target Explanation A cumulative column chart is used to represent a total count of the variable and shows how the total count increases over time. This example shows quarterly updates. A cumulative year on year column chart is used to represent a total count of the variable throughout the year. The variable value is reset to zero at the start of the year because the target for the metric is yearly. The line benchmarked chart shows our performance compared to the average performance of a peer group. The number at the bottom of the chart shows where we are ranked in the group (1 would mean ranked 1st that month). The line shows our performance, and the bar underneath represents the range of performance of benchmarked trusts (bottom = lowest performance, top = highest performance) A control chart shows movement of a variable in relation to its control limits (the 3 lines = Upper control limit, Mean and Lower control limit). When the value shows special variation (not expected) then it is highlighted green (leading to a good outcome) or red (leading to a bad outcome). Values are considered to show special variation if they -Go outside control limits -Have 6 points in a row above or below the mean, -Trend for 6 points, -Have 2 out of 3 points past 2/3 of the control limit, -Show a significant movement (greater than the average moving range). Variance from target charts is used to show how far away a variable is from its target each month. Green bars represent the value the metric is achieving better than target and the red bars represent the distance a metric is away from achieving its target. Page 3 of 24 Report to Trust Board in June 2024 Introduction The Performance KPI Report is presented to the Trust Board each month to provide assurance: • regarding the successful implementation of our strategy; and • that the care we provide is safe, caring, effective, responsive, and well led. The content of the report includes the following: • The ‘Spotlight’ section, to enable more detailed consideration of any topics that are of particular interest or concern. The selection of topics is informed by a rolling schedule, performance concerns, and requests from the Board. • An ‘NHS Constitution Standards’ section, summarising the standards and performance in relation to service waiting times; and • An ‘Appendix,’ with indicators presented monthly, aligned with the five themes within our strategy. Due to the timing of the April 2024 Board meeting, the following referral to treatment data points were not included in the March KPI report. They have now been updated for March 2024 and April 2024: - • 31 - Patients on an open 18 week pathway (within 18 weeks) • 33 - Patients on an open 18 week pathway (within 52 weeks) • 34 - Patients on an open 18 week pathway (within 65 weeks) • 35 - Patients on an open 18 week pathway (within 78 weeks) • 35a - Patients on an open 18 week pathway (within 104 weeks) • 32 - Total number of patients on a waiting list (18 week referral to treatment pathway) Changes of note within the report itself: • 53 – The digital metric monitoring page loading time for the CHARTS system has been tightened from under five seconds to under three seconds • 55 – The metric monitoring the rollout of inpatient noting for nurses has been removed as this is now considered complete. This will be revisited when the noting solution is rolled out for doctors • 39 - The 2024/25 national cancer target changes will be reflected next month when April 2024 data is made available • 40 - The 2024/25 national cancer target changes will be reflected next month when April 2024 data is made available • 37 - The metric now reflects the published 2024/25 national year-end target of 5% of patients waiting over 6 weeks for diagnostics Page 4 of 24 Report to Trust Board in June 2024 Summary This month’s spotlight report covers diagnostic performance. It highlights that UHS consistently increased the volume of elective diagnostic tests delivered throughout the 2023/24 financial year and into the start of the 2024/25 financial year. The diagnostic waiting list reduced by 12% in 2023/24 and in April 2024, 89.6% of patients received their diagnostics within six weeks. The national performance target has been set at 95% by March 2025 and the organisation is working with all services to ensure we maintain waiting times for services that are compliant and address any demand and capacity barriers preventing achievement. The paper describes the activity and performance trends for the hospital and explores modality sites in more detail. Areas of note in the appendix of performance metrics include: 1. The Emergency Department (ED) four hour performance position reduced to 66.0% (April 2024) from 71.7% (March 2024) for type 1 attendances, however UHS remain in the top quartile when compared to peer teaching hospitals across the country. 2. In April, the overall RTT waiting list increased by 2.4% to 59,485. 3. The trust continues to report zero patients waiting over 104 weeks and reported 15 patients waiting over 78 weeks for April 2024. All 15 patients are within ophthalmology and impacted by the ongoing national shortage of corneal graft tissue which is being overseen by NHS Blood and Transplant service. The longest waiting patients will be booked for surgery as soon tissue has been confirmed. 4. The trust reported 66 patients waiting over 65 weeks which predominantly reflects corneal transplant patients again and low volumes within gynaecology and several surgical specialties. The trust is committed to achieving the national target of zero patients waiting over 65 weeks by September 2024 and the ambition to achieve zero patients waiting over 52 weeks by March 2025. 5. The volume of patients not meeting the Criteria to Reside in hospital decreased in April averaging 216 which is a 10% reduction compared to March 2024, yet this remains a significant impact on patient flow through the organisation. 6. There were zero never events reported for April 2024. 7. The volume of medication errors reduced to two in April 2024 which is now below the monthly target following the increase seen in March 2023. 8. The number of Gram-negative bloodstream infections continues to be marginally above the monthly target of 19. The increased incidence in cases continues to be reported both nationally and locally across the Hampshire and Isle of Wight integrated care system. 9. The digital metric to monitor page loading times on CHARTS system has successfully remained at 99% despite increasing the time target by 40%. Ambulance response time performance The latest unvalidated weekly data is provided by the South Coast Ambulance Service (SCAS). In the week commencing 13th May 2024, our average handover time was 16 minutes 56 seconds across 725 emergency handovers and 22 minutes across 52 urgent handovers. There were 44handovers over 30 minutes, and six handovers taking over 60 minutes within the unvalidated data. The volume of weekly handovers over 60 minutes increased by 73% from March 2024 (averaging 7.5 per week) to April 2024 (averaging 13 per week). Page 5 of 24 Report to Trust Board in June 2024 Spotlight Report Spotlight: Diagnostic Performance The following report is based on the validated April 2024 submission. Introduction Diagnostics are a critical component of a patient’s pathway, facilitating an accurate and complete diagnosis, personalised treatment plans and the appropriate monitoring of a patient’s condition. Timely access to diagnostic tests is essential for ensuring that patients re ceive an early diagnosis whilst improving patient experience and delivering an efficient use of NHS resources. The 2024/24 NHS priorities and operational planning guidance confirmed that “systems are asked to continue to work towards the elective care recovery plan target of 95% of patients receiving their tests within 6 weeks”. The national ambitions acknowledged that the NHS delivered record diagnostic activity in 2023, but also highlighted that additional capacity in community diagnostic centres had been partly offset by an unprecedented increase in unscheduled diagnostic activity in acute trusts. This national diagnostic target applies to 15 different diagnostic tests, although performance is measured at a Trust level. These tests are broadly divided into three categories: • endoscopy (e.g. gastroscopy, cystoscopy); • imaging (e.g. CT, MRI, barium enema); • physiological measurement (e.g. echocardiogram, sleep studies). Our teams prioritise diagnostic procedures based on clinical urgency (for example patients with cancer) but aligned to this is a continual review of the longest waiting diagnostic patients. This spotlight paper highlights the current diagnostic performance position for UHS against the national targets and other hospitals. It also describes the current volumes of activity being delivered and the impact on the waiting list. We explore any performance concerns across the different modalities, outlining the challenges that services are facing and the steps being taken to achieve the 2024/25 target. In summary, there was an overall reduction in the diagnostic waiting list across the 2023/24 financial year as UHS successfully increased the delivery of diagnostic activity to manage current levels of demand. The diagnostic waiting list currently stands at 8,849 patients (April 2024) which is a reduction of 12% since April 2023 (10,033 patients) and 24% since the peak levels seen in June 2022 (11,671 patients). The April 2024 performance position is 89.6% for the percentage of patients receiving diagnostic tests within six weeks. The latest comparison data available (March 2024) placed the hospital 5th when ranked against peer teaching hospitals across the country. All organisations are facing challenges due to high demand, workforce shortages and equipment limitations and funding, but the organisation is striving to achieve the 95% target set for 2024/25. Page 6 of 24 Report to Trust Board in June 2024 Spotlight Report Activity and Waiting List Elective diagnostic activity being delivered at UHS consistently increased throughout 2023/24 and into 2024/25 helping to manage the waiting list despite high referral volumes and the complications caused by industrial action throughout the previous year. Graph 1 illustrates that diagnostic activity levels delivered in 2023/24 were 6% higher than 2022/23 and 17% higher than pre-pandemic levels. Overall there was a 12% reduction in the diagnostic waiting list across the 2023/24 financial year (graph 2) despite some levelling off in winter months and a small recent increase which is being closely monitored. The waiting list stands at 8849 patients for April 2024 which breaks down into
Url: /Media/UHS-website-2019/Docs/About-the-Trust/Trust-governance-and-corporate-docs/2024-Trust-documents/Papers-Trust-Board-6-June-2024.pdf

251 to 259 of 259

Previous … 22 23 24 25 26 Next

Browse site A to Z

Search results

Finance and Performance Reports 2020-21 Month 4 July 2020

Cisplatin-Pembrolizumab-Pemetrexed

Papers Council of Governors - 26 January 2022

Institutional information_2021_final

Whooping cough study - volunteers information sheet

UHS register of interests June 2025

Papers Trust Board - 5 November 2024

Engaging for increased research participation - full report

Papers Trust Board 6 June 2024

Site policies

Contact details

Useful links