The name for healthcare of older people at Eastbourne District General Hospital: patients' views and our response

Abstract ID
3314
Authors' names
H Baytree; L Tom; A Cennia; A Maliyakkal; A Nahhas
Author's provenances
Elderly Care Department, Eastbourne District General Hospital
Abstract category
Abstract sub-category

Abstract

Background

Eastbourne, on the East Sussex coast, has a population older than the national average. Older people make up a significant proportion of the hospital inpatient cohort, so services should be adapted to their needs. Language plays an important role in inclusion, but evidence is limited about preferred language in caring for older people. Anecdotally, "Elderly Care" did not resonate with patients. To find out more, surveys were conducted.

Methods

Surveys were used to find out patients' views on the name "Elderly Care" and identify other names they might prefer. Inpatients over 65 were asked how satisfied they were with the current name of the department (Elderly Care) and to rank their top 3 choices from a list of alternatives. 

Results

Data was collected from 53 inpatients on medical wards. The mean age of participants was 80.3 years, with a range of 65-99 years. There were 24 women and 29 men. All but one participant reported their ethnicity as white, white British or British. Socioeconomic factors were not evaluated. 74% of participants were somewhat satisfied or very satisfied with the name "Elderly Care."  

"Senior Healthcare," "Department of Medicine for Older People (DMOP)/Medicine for Older People (MOP)" and "Care of Older People (COP)" were popular. Whilst Senior Healthcare was most popular as a first choice, Care of Older People appeared as a top 3 choice more times overall.   

Conclusions

Locally we felt that a name change would not improve satisfaction, given 74% of survey participants were satisfied with the current name. There was not a clear consensus among participants as to which options were preferred and disliked, which may reflect the wide age range and differing lived experiences of participants. It is not known how generalisable these results are, but they add to the limited evidence in this area.