What did members say?
When asked why they had given their response to the above question, members were given the chance to explain in their own words. Seventy one people left comments. The word cloud to the left shows the most commonly-used words. All the below were mentioned between 3 and 23 times (the larger the word, the more mentions it had).
There were many comments that all of these activities and functions were important and that it was a struggle to single any one out as a priority:
- “All of these activities are equally important and make the BGS relevant”
- “All the above keeps me updated, connected and have a sense of belonging/sharing with like minded individuals”
- “The BGS has many important roles and it’s hard to say which is more important.”
- “Difficult to answer as all the items are important”
- “All are important!!”
- “Difficult to decide what is most important as they are all important areas.”
However one strong theme that emerged was the role of BGS in supporting professionals, particularly in terms of multi-disciplinary working:
- “The BGS is a great platform for multi-specialty collaboration between people from different disciplines as it has members not just from one specialty and it has representatives from primary and secondary care”
- “I believe the BGS plays a vital role in supporting and guiding healthcare professionals. It is important the care of older people is recognised as a specialism.”
- “There is a need to support those providing health care to older people in all above fields and BGS is striving to address all of them”
- “I believe that improvements in my own clinical practice has been as a result of collaboration with other professionals within the BGS and that is why I feel conferences and opportunities to meet with others is so important.”
- “I believe providing a space for collective policy action to improve how healthcare is delivered in primary and secondary care, including in nursing homes, is of utmost importance.”
- “Obviously useful to collaborate with colleagues and education. However its those specialties who don't care about these people that we need to address.”
- “I think for me the key BGS roles are to further the profession and care of older people through any means.”
- “I also think it is a collaborative society which should be congratulated and strengthened”
Most felt that this was best achieved through a combination of education, training, research, information providing/sharing and policy influencing. More broadly, policy in particular was mentioned by many as an important place to start in bringing about the changes needed in health, social care, training and workforce.
Other members focused their thoughts on what they can gain from the BGS as individuals. These centred mainly around events, CPD, resources and information or updates, perhaps suggesting the financial value of membership:
- “Vital source of CPD and policy guidance.”
- “Would prefer more online based resources as most of meetings are held in London”
- “I find the updates /briefings sent through Facebook means that I keep up to date with current policies, information, research on a daily accessible basis”
- “I value the comms eg GCA for Primary care”
- “The BGS should focus on being a 'go to resource' for guidelines, tool kits etc on all aspects of medicine for older people”
- “It is a resource for networking, training and influencing policy!”
- “Developing the workforce- both training and CPD for existing professionals is core business”
- “Very useful to have a reliable ‘go to’ resource for updates etc. Blogs and newsfeeds are an efficient way to keep up to date”
- “Regularly flagging up items is helpful”
- “The BGS should be seen as a reliable and authoritative source of information”
- “Any of the BGS conferences I have been to have been excellent - progressive with a wide range of topics and speakers.”
- “Most CPD is not relevant so when the BGS do something useful it's very helpful. They should do more”
- “This enables me to keep up to date with important information”
How can the Society have the most impact and influence?
The second part of the survey addressed how members felt the society could have most impact and influence. As before, respondents were asked to rate eight areas by importance on a scale of 1-5 (with 1 being ‘not important whatsoever’ and 5 being ‘extremely important’).
These areas were:
- Seeking to ensure government policy on health and social care responds to the needs of older people [Policy]
- Strengthening the evidence base on geriatric medicine through the generation and uptake of high-quality research [Research/Evidence]
- Delivering highly effective meetings and events, often in partnership with others [Events]
- Increasing its public profile, through policy commentary, social media and wider media [Communications]
- Encouraging trainee doctors, nurses and other health professionals to specialise in the healthcare of older people [Promotion of geriatrics]
- Building skills and knowledge through training curricula and wider understanding of frailty [Training]
- Improving tools, resources and information about clinical practice associated with older people’s healthcare [Information/Resources]
- Working with others to reduce avoidable diseases and conditions of older age through prevention/early action programmes [Prevention]
More than three quarters (75.6%) of respondents said that policy influencing was ‘Extremely important’, with almost as many (73%) giving the same importance to encouraging people to specialise in the healthcare of older people.
A huge 98% said that policy influence was either ‘Extremely important’ or ‘Quite important’ in terms of the BGS having the most impact and influence.
Very few people rated any of the options as ‘Not important whatsoever’ or ‘Not particularly important’ with between 1-6% given these ratings across all of the categories, indicating that members feel the BGS can potentially have impact and influence in all areas.
Taken as a weighted average, adjusted for all rankings, areas of potential influence are ranked in the following order:
- Policy (weighted average score 4.72)
- Promotion of geriatrics (weighted average score 4.68)
- Research/Evidence (weighted average score 4.55)
- Training (weighted average score 4.46)
- Events (weighted average score 4.45)
- Information/Resources (weighted average score 4.42)
- Communications (weighted average score 4.32)
- Prevention (weighted average score 4.19)