Poll shows patients are satisfied

The great majority of NHS patients are happy with the quality of the medical care they receive.

This is revealed in a special poll conducted this week for the Evening Standard. It is a remarkable testimonial considering the fact that two thirds of patients had to face a wait of up to six hours to be admitted to hospital and a quarter had to accept delays of up to three months between seeing their doctor and being treated in a hospital.

ICM found that as many as 88 per cent of people with recent personal or family experience of the NHS were "very" or "quite" satisfied with the treatment given by their GP.

The figure for hospital out-patients is almost as high: 87 per cent, with in-patients (83 per cent) and accident and emergency patients (82 per cent) following only a little behind.

However, that still leaves a significant minority who are dissatisfied, rising from 11 per cent for GPs to 17 per cent for in-patients and accident and emergency patients.

Londoners are more likely to be dissatisfied than patients in the rest of the South-East.

The conclusions of the poll show that the challenges facing the NHS go way beyond long waiting times for hospital treatment - though the poll shows that these, too, are a huge source of criticism.

However, the poll also gives strong backing to Gordon Brown's decision to raise National Insurance rates to fund more spending on the NHS, with supporters of this policy outnumbering opponents by three-toone.

This is the first poll since the Budget to test the views of people living in and around London - and the experiences of users of the NHS. In the past year, more than four out of 10 adults have direct experience of NHS hospitals, either because they have needed treatment themselves, or because an immediate member of their family has needed treatment.

More than eight out of 10 have recent direct personal or family experience of the GP service.

This is what they say.

Level of satisfaction: Two in three Londoners say they, or their close relative, had to wait more than an hour for medical attention after arriving at casualty. Outside London the figure falls to 57 per cent, but that is still a majority.

Almost half of all Londoners had to wait more than three hours.

That is one NHS pressure point, keenly felt by patients, that does not figure in the Government's main waiting time and waiting list targets. The other pressure point is the family doctor service.

On the most recent occasion they sought an appointment with their GP, only one in six was able to get a time within 24 hours. As many as 31 per cent had to wait more than a week. The people who say they had the longest waits are working class patients and the elderly. Once they had their appointment, three out of four were seen within 20 minutes of the allotted time; but 13 per cent had to wait more than half an hour. As for hospital waiting lists - and the out-patient waiting list to get on the in-patient waiting list - our poll confirms the message from government statistics: far too many people have to wait too long. Twenty-seven per cent of people who ended up as in-patients had to wait more than three months to see a hospital consultant or other doctor, and 29 per cent then had to wait a further three months or more in order to receive treatment.

Waiting times: Sixteen per cent of people living within Greater London were dissatisfied with the treatment they received from their family doctor; outside London, the proportion falls to only nine per cent. The figures for out-patients are similar (16 per cent dissatisfied inside London, 10 per cent outside). However, there is little difference between those living inside and outside London over the treatment given to in-patients and in casualty.

When people are asked about nonmedical aspects of their care, huge majorities are once again satisfied with their GP and with hospital inpatient and out-patient services.

But the numbers dissatisfied with their experiences in hospital casualty departments jump to 30 per cent and inside London to as many as 38 per cent. By far the biggest cause of complaint is delays in being seen.

Will extra cash improve the NHS? : As many as 69 per cent of people in London and the South-East approve of Mr Brown's decision to raise National Insurance contributions to fund higher spending on the NHS. Only 23 per cent disapprove.

There seems to be a broad consensus on this: the figures are much the same for men and women, rich and poor, and whether or not respondents have recent experience of NHS hospitals.

However, only 11 per cent think the extra cash will "greatly" improve the NHS.

A further 50 per cent are more cautious, saying the NHS will improve only "somewhat". Mr Brown and Alan Milburn, the Health Secretary, will be pleased that six in 10 expect the service to improve. But they will be disappointed that the optimism is so guarded.

ICM also tested the view that some critics of the NHS have suggested that taxation should not bear the sole brunt of funding a better health service, and that ministers should explore private

investment as a possible source of some of the extra money. By a clear but far from overwhelming margin - or 48 to 36 per cent - more people think all the money should come from general taxation, with 16 per cent not sure.

? ICM Research interviewed 1,080 adults by phone, living in London and the South-East aged over 18, between 22 and 23 April 2002.

Of these, 1,007 respondents were selected at random.

In addition, 73 booster interviews were conducted with those who had been an inpatient at an NHS hospital, to bring the total sample of NHS hospital patients to 484 - including 305 inpatients and 354 outpatients (175 had experience both as inpatients and outpatients).

The data has been weighted to the profile of all adults in the London and South-East region.