Portsmouth LINk
Transition Group Priorities List
A number of issues regarding health and social care in
Portsmouth have been highlighted to the transition group through public
meetings, engagement with the local community and engagement with local health
and social care providers. In order to ensure that the work of the group is
transparent and meets the needs of the community we serve these issues need to
be prioritised. Through researching the methods of weighting or prioritising
issues in other LINks, a priority setting framework used by the Knowsley LINk
was assessed. This scheme uses five criteria to quantify the range, scope and
impact of issues within the community. These five criteria are:
·
Severity: is the condition/concern life
threatening or lead to chronic life implications? This criterion requires the
use of health outcomes.
·
Frequency: how many people have this
condition/concern? This criterion requires the use of national or local
statistics, or evidence based on clinical reporting. This information was found
through the Office for National Statistics, the Health Profile for Portsmouth
and other official health documents.
·
Risk: how many people may be affected by this
condition/concern in the future? This criterion required the use of some health
forecasting where available and objective analysis of risk factor trends.
·
Impact on the community: what is the current
impact on the community of this condition/concern, are underrepresented or
vulnerable groups being impacted? Will the impact increase if it is not
addressed? This criterion used information derived from the above criteria in
addition to anecdotal evidence and expertise of transition group members where
appropriate.
·
Feasibility of response: What are the possible
responses to the condition/concern? Are resources available to the group in order
to respond? Does the transition group possess the relevant and necessary skills
and abilities to implement the response? This criterion required discussion of
the possible responses, the work already carried out by the LINk, previous
attempts to engage with health and social care providers on these issues as
appropriate and the resources and abilities available to the group.
·
Commitment: Is there wider local support for
addressing this condition/concern? Are there government programmes in place?
Are other community groups engaging in this issue? This criterion required
discussion of local and national health and social care priorities as well as
local independent responses to conditions/concerns by third party
organisations.
The transition group including voting and non-voting members
discussed these criteria over two meetings. Each voting member gave each
condition/concern a score out of ten for each criterion. The results of these
votes are in the table below. Once all scores had been given, an average score
was created which resulted in the priorities list. These scores whilst evidence
based are subjective and are applicable to a specific context, as such other
groups undertaking the same exercise may have different results.
|
|
Severity
|
Risk
|
Impact on Community
|
Feasibility of Response
|
Wider Commitment
|
Score
|
|
Dual Diagnosis
|
9.5
|
8.6
|
10
|
3.4
|
6.2
|
7.54
|
|
Homelessness Service
|
8.4
|
9.2
|
9.8
|
3
|
6
|
7.28
|
|
Detox Services
|
9.6
|
6.6
|
9.6
|
6.4
|
4
|
7.24
|
|
End of Life Care
|
8.6
|
6.8
|
7.8
|
3
|
5
|
6.24
|
|
Transfer of Care
|
5.4
|
5.2
|
7.4
|
6.8
|
3.2
|
5.6
|
|
Vascular
|
9.2
|
4.8
|
6
|
1
|
1.4
|
4.48
|
|
Children’s Dental Health
|
5.2
|
6.2
|
8.8
|
1
|
3
|
4.3
|
|
OOH Messages
|
3.4
|
4.2
|
0.8
|
1.2
|
9
|
3.72
|