May 2013
Public Service Productivity Estimates: Healthcare
Response to the user engagement survey results
Between December 2012 and February 2013 a Public Service Productivity Estimates: Healthcare user engagement survey was
conducted using a web questionnaire linked from the online publication.
Both in accordance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics and in response to the 2011 assessment of the publication’s
compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics, the user engagement survey was conducted with particular focus on
the following objectives:


To investigate and document the use made of statistics contained in Public Service Productivity Estimates: Healthcare
2010
To seek feedback from users regarding the content, presentation and timing of releases and publish information about
users’ experiences.
The results of this survey are included in the appendix attached to this report. These comments have been reviewed and this
information note highlights the key findings and ONS plans for future development of the statistics and user engagement.
Types of users
Respondents worked in the Health sector or Central Government departments or agencies. Respondents describe themselves as
analysts, researchers and policy makers.
Uses of the Public Service Productivity Estimates: Healthcare publication
In order to evaluate user needs, a question was asked to assess use of the publication. The question was ‘What do you use the
estimates in the Public Service Productivity Estimates: Healthcare 2010 release for?’ Of the responders to the survey question,
the most common answers were:




Benchmarking (6 out of 8 respondents)
Modelling and/or forecasting (5 out of 8 respondents)
General background information (4 out of 8 respondents)
Research (3 out of 8 respondents)
Areas of interest
In addition, to investigate specific areas of interest within the publication, a question was included to assess areas of importance
to users. According to the survey results, the estimates of most interest were:





Index of healthcare productivity (8 out of 8 respondents)
Index of healthcare inputs (7 out of 8 respondents)
Index of healthcare outputs (7 out of 8 respondents)
Healthcare quantity and output indices (7 out of 8 respondents)
Average cost of healthcare output and implicit input price (7 out of 8 respondents)
The most popular tables were:





Healthcare quantity expenditure shares by component (6 out of 7 respondents)
Comparison of output, inputs and productivity indices, compared with previously published estimates (6 out of 7
respondents)
Comparison of quantity by component in this article, with previously published estimates (6 out of 7 respondents)
Comparisons of labour, goods and services and capital indices in this article with previously published estimates (6 out
of 7 respondents)
Contribution of new assumptions on non-NHS provision to healthcare quantity revisions (6 out of 7 respondents)
User perceptions of the Public Service Productivity Estimates: Healthcare publication
Positive response
Most people thought the statistical presentation of the work was good and all respondents noted the service they received for
the release as either good or very good. Most respondents were satisfied with the ease of access, clarity, relevance and
adherence to planned publication dates of the release. They were also satisfied with the comparability over time and between
sources and the metadata.
Areas for improvement
There was slight concern about the timeliness of the publication and the accuracy of the estimates within the response. In
response to the comments, an updated source and methods article will be published and the scope of productivity measures will
be kept under review.
Future strategy for user engagement
The voluntary nature of this user survey means the results are unlikely to be fully representative of the article user population.
For this reason the responses from this survey may perhaps be best judged as representing important views for those who were
most likely to respond. The results may inform us about a key group within our user population, but further user intelligence will
be useful to ensure that all user needs can be effectively provided for.
ONS will continue to develop its knowledge of its users and how they use the statistics contained in this publication. ONS will do
this through:
1)
2)
3)
Increased use of web-metrics
Web metrics have been employed to demonstrate and approximate level of use (visits, views and popularity ranking) of
the healthcare productivity publication.
User Engagement surveys
A user engagement survey will be included in each release of the healthcare productivity publication, where possible
Meetings and consultations
Future face-to-face user meetings or consultations will be planned as required. Communication with users will continue
via email and through regular functional board meetings with our data suppliers.
Prior to the next survey, please contact the Public Service Productivity team at [email protected] if you have any
queries or feedback on the Public Service Productivity Estimates: Healthcare publication.
Issued by:
Office for National Statistics, Government Buildings, Cardiff Road, Newport, NP10 8XG.
Appendix A: Survey Monkey Results
Page 4, Q2. For each of the categories chosen in the previous question please provide more detail on the types
of decisions taken as a result.
1
2
As part of Service Line Reporting that links to strategic development, I think that it
is important to be comparing the cost of different inputs to check where the
efficiencies within the healthcare economy might lie.
High level strategic decisions are informed by assessments of productivity growth
3
Comparison of trends with SLR position of our Trust
Feb 11, 2013 9:23 AM
Feb 7, 2013 1:45 PM
Dec 21, 2012 11:13
AM
Page 7, Q2. Why did you give this rating?
Never been disappointed Dec 21, 2012 11:14 AM
Page 10, Q1. Please enter any additional comments you wish to make in relation to the Public Service Productivity
Estimates: Healthcare 2010 release. For example, are there any areas of the article which you don't find useful, or
any additional areas which you would like to see covered?
1
2
3
I think that every analyst would like to see the scope extended, especially in
relation to primary care/GP productivity
Just to emphasise that the focus should be on improving estimation techniques,
that's the most important issue.
A technical article setting out more details of the sources, methodology etc. would
be very helpful.
Feb 11, 2013 9:26 AM
Feb 7, 2013 1:47 PM
Jan 29, 2013 2:15 PM