MAHC task force releases results of public survey on hospital sites

1
Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInEmail this to someonePrint this page

In a newsletter released today, Muskoka Algonquin Healthcare’s Capital Plan Development Task Force shared results from its feedback survey which was open from August 28 to October 13, 2017.

Of the 2,183 responses received, the overwhelming majority were permanent residents (2,039 or 93.4 per cent), almost two-thirds were between the ages of 50 and 75 (1,338 or 61 per cent), and, of the options presented, more than three-quarters preferred the Two Sites (not status quo) model (1,725 or 79 per cent).

The top five criteria chosen by respondents were:

  • Provides access to care with reasonable travel times (82.23 per cent strongly agree, 13.88 per cent agree)
  • Facilitates the safest care by meeting infection control, health & safety etc. requirements (70.64 per cent strongly agree, 24.28 per cent agree)
  • Assists with recruiting and retaining the best staff, physicians and volunteers (65.19 per cent strongly agree, 29 per cent agree)
  • Is able to accommodate future needs to grow and change (57.49 per cent strongly agree, 35 per cent agree)
  • Is supported by our communities at large (59.46 per cent strongly agree, 31.52 per cent agree)

Eighty-eight per cent of respondents (1,925) said they would support a portion of municipal taxes contributing toward future hospital development need.

Although there were three questions that asked for comments — what the respondent likes and dislikes about each of the three hospital models — those comments in full have not been included in the report. Instead, task force members “each were responsible for reviewing a subset of the comments provided by respondents (likes and dislikes for each model)” and generated a summary table outlining themes they identified.

Click here to download a copy of the report (PDF) or visit the Planning for the Future section of the MAHC website and select the ‘Consultation’ page.

Based on feedback from the task force and the public, the newsletter indicates that information updates have been made to the Planning for the Future section of the MAHC website “to avoid potential confusion between previous planning work and the new chapter of work through the Stage 1 process the task force is overseeing. Historic information continues to be available.”

At its November 27 meeting, task force members also discussed evaluation criteria proposed “for objectively measuring and evaluating the different models. Time was spent discussing definitions of criteria, the concept of access based on a research paper gleaned from the National Center for Biotechnology Information, as well as patient safety indicator documents from Health Quality Ontario,” according to the newsletter.

Finally, the newsletter says that task force members shared their feedback from a workshop held on November 17, which involved task force members, hospital clinicians, community providers, and MAHC Board Directors, to define the One Site Inpatient, One Site Outpatient model, although details of that feedback were not released. A further workshop is being scheduled with the participants to develop the Two Sites (not status quo) model.

Watch for more on this story on Doppler soon.

Related stories:

Hospital survey under fire for its design, nets 2,200 responses

Review of the results of MAHC future planning survey is underway

Community urged to get informed about hospital models being considered

MAHC chair doesn’t think enough savings can be found to keep two hospitals going in Muskoka

Don’t miss out on Doppler! Sign up for our free newsletter here.

print

1 Comment

  1. This survey was flawed right from the start and the results shown are totally flawed because of this. When do we start getting some intelligent and fair polls rather than one-sided, incomplete wastes of time as this one became? I am disgusted and fed up with the manipulative game playing that has dragged on over such a long time on such an important issue – ENOUGH! Proves what all are saying – we need a completely new Board that will respect the residents.

Leave a reply below. Comments without both first & last name will not be published. Your email address is required for validation but will not be publicly visible.