1 / 16

Human Tissue Authority Stakeholder Evaluation 2010

Human Tissue Authority Stakeholder Evaluation 2010. Michele Corrado Ipsos MORI 28 September 2010. Objectives of the 2010 Research. Two key elements: - General Public Evaluation (of HTA’s work as regulator of human tissue etc)

ulla
Download Presentation

Human Tissue Authority Stakeholder Evaluation 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Human Tissue Authority Stakeholder Evaluation 2010 Michele Corrado Ipsos MORI28 September 2010

  2. Objectives of the 2010 Research • Two key elements: - General Public Evaluation (of HTA’s work as regulator of human tissue etc) - Professional Stakeholder Evaluation (of HTA’s work as regulator of human tissue etc) • To build on 2007 and 2009 stakeholder work • The project is related to action in the Hampton Implementation Review (2009)

  3. Overall Goal • To create a regulatory system for the removal, storage, use and disposal of human tissue and organs that is clear, consistent and proportionate, and in which professionals, patients, families and members of the public have confidence

  4. Project Overview Planning meeting 13 April 2010 Development meeting 20 April 2010 Professional Stakeholder Evaluation: 19 Key Opinion Leader depth interviews, split by sector 26 May -21 June Online survey of 349 DIs, IAs, AAs (‘Professional Groups’) 14 June - 2 July 2010 (New element in 2010) General Public Evaluation: - c.1,000 GB adults 15+ 13 - 19 August 2010- c.1,000 GB adults 15+ 20 - 26 August 2010 Reporting & Public Authority Meeting September 2010

  5. Researching Professional Groups • New group (not surveyed in 2007) • All Professional Groups stakeholders on the HTA’s database (768) emailed a unique link • 349 returns, adjusted response rate of 46%

  6. Key Findings Among Professional Groups • Awareness high (91% know HTA, 36% very well) • 68% favourable (highest in Transplants, lowest in Post-Mortem – a distinction that generally applies across most measures) • 58% are advocates, high c.f. other ‘Ipsos MORI benchmark’ public sector organisations • 49% think performance improved, only 8% say converse • Confidence very high (86%), and 39% say it has improved in past 3 years • Doing very well on keeping them informed (84% : 2nd in Ipsos MORI benchmarks • Most activities asked about are deemed important for HTA, and most of these (but not all), are deemed effective

  7. Effective vs. Importance Producing codes of practice Overseeing the consent requirementsof the Human Tissue Act Providing an effective website Providing licences Giving advice and guidance on interpreting relevant legislation Providing training events and workshops Inspecting to ensure good standards and appropriate procedures Understand the risk of organ or bone marrow donation Improving professional confidence Improving public confidence % Effective Working with Govt and Europe to implement legislation Ensuring safety of human tissue and cells Working with other organisations to ensure joined up regulation, advice and guidance Ensuring medical schools and surgeons have access to bodies for education and training Ensure dignity and respect for the deceased Reducing the burden on your sector Providing value for money for the tax payer Ensuring researchers have access to high quality samples Supporting business and innovation % Important

  8. Key Findings Among Professional Groups Cont/… • Most of the communication is electronic - this is broadly welcomed • Communications in general highly rated (Over 80% say ‘good’ across sectors). • Codes Of Practice very well read/ well received across sectors

  9. Advocacy is high compared to other organisations for which Ipsos MORI has benchmarks Which of these phrases best describes the way you would speak of the …. to other people? % Advocates Regulator NDPB Regional body HTA Regional body Regional body Regional body Regional body NDPB NDPB Regional body Regional body Govt Dept Govt Dept Regulator Govt Dept Govt Dept Govt Dept Regional body Base: Various user and stakeholder surveys of public sector organisations

  10. Keeping stakeholders informed – very high, compared to Ipsos MORI benchmarks How well informed, if at all, do you think… keeps you about its work? % Informed Regulator HTA Regulator NDPB Govt Dept Regional body Regional body Govt Dept Regional body Regional body Regional body Regional body NDPB Regional body NDPB Regional body Regional body Base: Various user and stakeholder surveys of public sector organisations

  11. Researching the General Public – 2 separate surveys • A face-to-face general public quantitative survey of 967 GB adults aged 15 + (13 - 19 August 2010). Covering…. confidence, awareness, benefits/drawbacks of regulation, attitudes towards various donation scenarios, impact of regulation on donation 2. A face-to-face general public quantitative survey of 1,019 GB adults aged 15+ (20 - 26 August 2010). Covering….recall of donation stories in the media, and impact of these on attitudes towards donation

  12. Ipsos MORI General Public Issues Index: September 2010 What would you say is the most important issue facing Britain today? What do you see as other important issues facing Britain today? Change since August Top mentions % -4 Economy +1 Race relations/immigration +2 Unemployment +5 Crime/law and order +1 NHS 0 Education/Schools +1 Inflation/prices Defence/Foreign Affairs/ Terrorism -5 -1 Pensions/Benefits Base: 978 British adults 18+, 3th – 9th Sept 2010 Source: Ipsos MORI Issues Index

  13. General Public Results – Main Survey Key Finding: • Good news on confidence in regulation: + 5 percentage points since 2007 (52% to 57%)

  14. General Public Results – Main Survey Cont/… Other Findings: • Spontaneous awareness of HTA as a regulator is low (2%) – typical for arms-length health bodies • Likelihood of donation is very issue-specific (38%-66% likely; 23%-50% unlikely) • 10-21% of those unlikely to donate (depending on the donation in question) say they ‘haven’t thought about it’ • Impact of regulation on confidence to donate is relatively strong – those offering positive views (43%-52%) outweigh those giving negative views, who are in the minority (16%-23%)

  15. General Public Results – Media Questions • 46% say they have read or heard something in the media about people choosing, while alive to donate their tissue/organs for transplantation – most commonly on TV (30%) or in newspapers (19%) • 19% who have seen/heard such coverage say it makes them feel more confident that there are the correct processes in place for the regulation of (such) donation to be conducted properly • 40% have read or heard something in the media about people choosing to donate their body, for medical education and training purposes, for use after their death • 24% who have seen/heard such coverage say it makes them feel more confident that there are the correct processes in place for the regulation of body donation to be conducted properly

  16. Any questions? • Michele Corrado michele.corrado@ipsos.com • John Leaman john.leaman@ipsos.com • Georgia O’Grady georgia.ogrady@ipsos.com Tel 020 7347 3000 THANK YOU

More Related