CHAPTER TWO: MAIN FINDINGS
2.1 The main findings from the research are summarised below.
Sample background
2.2 A key influence on people's knowledge about and attitudes to hospital accommodation, more specifically in relation to single rooms versus multiple occupancy wards, is the extent of their experience of hospitals and hospital accommodation generally. While it is important to recognise that people's perceptions can be influenced by many sources such as television, other media and word of mouth, we also wanted to establish the level of first hand experience of hospital accommodation in the sample.
2.3 We identified three main ways in which people would gain experience of and knowledge about hospital accommodation: working in a hospital or visiting one in the course of one's work; staying in hospital as an in-patient; or visiting another person in hospital.
2.4 Respondents were asked whether they worked in a hospital or regularly visited hospitals in the course of their work. The results are shown in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 Experience of hospitals through work
Base: All respondents (990)
2.5 It can be seen that the vast majority of the sample did not have experience of hospital accommodation due to work related reasons. Although this varied a little by demographic group as one might expect with, for example, greater numbers of women and fewer of those above retirement age falling into this category, these differences were small and unlikely to have any effect on the views of this group as a whole.
2.6 Respondents were also asked whether they had, in the last five years, been an in-patient in hospital. It was important to limit this to the last five years to ensure that those that fell into this category had experience of relatively modern hospitals. The results are shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2 Experience of staying in hospital as an in-patient in the past five years
Base: All respondents (990)
2.7 Nearly two thirds of the sample had not stayed in hospital as an in-patient in the past five years. For those who had stayed in hospital, the most common type of accommodation was a multi-bedded ward of up to six people, in which 24% of respondents had stayed, followed by a single room (13% of respondents had stayed in this type of accommodation). Respondents were less likely to have stayed in a large ward with more than six people with only 7% of the sample having done so.
2.8 Women were more likely than men to have stayed in hospital, however, there were no real differences in the types of accommodation experienced by women compared to men. Perhaps surprisingly, there was very little difference by age. Those aged 25 to 44 were slightly more likely to have been an in-patient in hospital in the last five years, and those aged 45 to 54 were slightly less likely to have stayed in hospital. Once again, there was little difference in the types of accommodation experienced by different age groups.
2.9 Those in social group DE were more likely than any other social group to have stayed in hospital in the past five years, with nearly half of DEs having done so compared to around one third of those in other social groups. Those in the AB group (the highest social group) were more likely than those in other social groups to have stayed in a single room while in hospital, with over half of those who had been in hospital staying in single room accommodation. This may reflect a greater tendency to use private hospitals where single rooms are more prevalent, but it is important to remember that this is based on a small number of patients (N=35 staying in single rooms).
2.10 There was no difference in experience of staying in hospital accommodation by location.
2.11 Those respondents who had stayed in hospital accommodation in the past five years were asked how many nights in total they estimated that they had spent there.
Figure 2.3 Number of nights spent as an in-patient in the past five years
Base: All respondents who have stayed in hospital accommodation in the past five years (363)
2.12 It is important to remember that the number of nights reported by each respondent is a cumulative total of all the occasions they have been in hospital. The graph shows that, as we would expect, it was most common for people to stay in hospital for short periods of time.
2.13 There was no real variation by gender and, as expected, there was a tendency for those aged 55 and over to be more likely to have spent longer in hospital compared to those in younger age groups. Almost half of those in this age group who had stayed in hospital had spent 10 or more nights. Those in the lowest social grade, DE, were more likely to have spent 10 or more nights in hospital (40% had done so) than those in other social grades (around one quarter of people in all other social grades had done so). These figures reflect previously established patterns relating to health, age and social grade.
2.14 We also wanted to establish how much experience respondents had of hospital accommodation as visitors. We first asked those respondents who had children aged under 16 (N=296, 29% of the sample) if they had been to visit their child in hospital in the past five years. Only 29% of this sub-group had done so. As this is only 85 respondents in total, it is not possible to break these results down further, although the type of accommodation in which the children stayed follows the same pattern as adults. The largest number of children had stayed in a multi-bedded ward of six or less, followed by a single room and fewer had stayed in a large ward of more than six.
2.15 Respondents were then asked if they had visited someone staying as an in-patient in hospital in the past five years. Please note that, of the respondents who had visited their child in hospital, 91% had also responded yes to this question and we are confident that they would draw on both experiences when completing the survey. The results of this question are shown in Figure 2.4.
Figure 2.4 Experience of visiting someone staying in hospital in the past five years
Base: All respondents (990)
2.16 Three quarters of the sample had visited someone in hospital in the past five years. Half of the sample had experience of visiting someone staying in a multi-bedded ward of up to six people, around one quarter had visited someone staying in a single room and just less than one fifth of respondents had visited someone staying in a large ward of more than six people.
2.17 There were no differences in terms of gender. There was little variation in terms of age, although those aged 16 to 24 were less likely to have visited someone in hospital than those in other age groups (68% had done so).
2.18 Those who lived in the East/South of Scotland were slightly less likely to have visited someone in hospital in the past five years than those in other areas of the country, with 69% having done so compared to 79% of those living in both the North and the West.
2.19 Those respondents who had visited someone (either their child or someone else) staying in hospital as an in-patient in the past five years were also asked on how many different days they estimated they had visited. The results are shown in Figure 2.5.
2.20 Around one in three people had visited someone in hospital on between one and three different days. Similarly one in three had visited on between four and nine different days and on between 10 and 49 different days. It was much less common to have visited on more occasions than this, with only 9% having done so. It is important to remember that this is a cumulative number of visits and could include visiting more than one person or visiting the same person on multiple occasions. As an indication of how much experience the sample has of current hospital accommodation, this would suggest that the majority of respondents have a reasonable amount of experience and some have much experience.
Figure 2.5 Number of different days on which respondents visited someone staying in hospital
Base: All who have visited their child or another person staying in hospital in the past five years (759)
Perceptions of what NHS hospitals look like today
2.21 A related issue was the degree to which people are aware of the nature of hospital accommodation currently provided by NHS Scotland. To assess this, respondents were shown pictures of three types of hospital ward and asked which one they thought was most common in hospitals nowadays. The pictures showed a smaller multi-bedded ward, a larger multi-bedded ward and a single room. The pictures are shown in Appendix 3. Figure 2.6 shows the responses to this question.
Figure 2.6 Perceptions of which type of accommodation is most common
Base: All respondents (990)
2.22 Respondents are aware that there are different types of hospital accommodation available. As we have noted, the majority of the sample had recent experience of hospital accommodation with the largest proportion of people who had stayed in hospital or visited hospital having experience of multi-bedded wards of up to six people. This was reflected in responses when asked about the type of accommodation they thought was most common. The majority of respondents (60%) said that smaller multi-bedded wards were the most common type of ward. However, despite the fact that people had greater experience of staying in and visiting single rooms compared with large multi-bedded wards, they did not believe that single rooms were more common. Thirty two percent of respondents thought that large multi-bedded wards were the most common type of accommodation, while very few respondents thought that single rooms were the most common (5%).
2.23 There was no difference by age, and though the youngest and oldest age groups thought the balance between large and small wards was more even, there was no difference in the proportion saying that single rooms were the most common type of accommodation. While in all areas the majority believed smaller multi-bedded wards were most common, a greater proportion of those living in the west of Scotland thought that larger multi-bedded wards were the most common (38%) compared with those in the south/east (24%) and the north (32%).
2.24 Those in the AB group were considerably more likely to believe that smaller multi-bedded wards were the most common type of accommodation (73% gave this response) and, despite the fact that a higher proportion of people in this social group had stayed in single rooms compared to other social groups, only 1% of ABs thought that single room accommodation was the most common.
2.25 There were no differences in the responses of those who worked in or visited hospitals in the course of their work compared with those who did not. This may suggest that the sample, as a whole, had a relatively accurate perception of what type of hospital accommodation is most common. There were also no differences between those who had and had not stayed in hospital.
2.26 Those who had visited someone staying in hospital were more likely than those who had not to think that smaller multi-bedded wards were the most common type of accommodation (63% of those who had compared with 50% of those who hadn't) no matter what sort of accommodation they had actually visited.
Preferences for different types of hospital accommodation
2.27 One of our objectives was to assess people's preferences in terms of which type of accommodation they would like to stay in, were they admitted to hospital. The responses to this question are shown in Figure 2.6.
2.28 By far the most preferred option was to be accommodated in a single room, with 41% of the sample saying they would prefer to stay in this type of accommodation. However, it must be remembered that this still accounts for less than half the sample. Twenty two percent of respondents would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward of up to six people, while very few would prefer to stay in a large ward of more than six people. Twenty seven percent said they would not mind what sort of accommodation they stayed in.
Figure 2.6 Type of accommodation preferred if admitted to hospital
Base: All respondents (990)
2.29 Men were much more likely to say that they didn't mind what sort of accommodation they stayed in (34% of men compared with 21% of women). Those in the younger age groups were the most likely to want to stay in a single room, with nearly half of those aged 16 to 34 saying they would prefer this type of accommodation. In contrast fewer of those in older age groups (37% of those aged 55 to 64 and 28% of those aged 65 and over) would like to stay in a single room, but were more likely than other groups to report a preference for multi-bedded wards of up to six people (preferred by 30% of those aged 55 to 64 and 36% of those aged 65 and over).
2.30 Preference for single room accommodation increased with social grade (30% of those in the DE group would prefer this type of accommodation compared to 36% of C2s, 41% of C1s and 58% of ABs). ABC1s were much less likely to want to stay in a multi-bedded ward of up to six people. Less than one in five respondents in these groups expressed a preference for this type of accommodation compared with over one quarter of C2DEs. There was no real difference in preference by area.
2.31 Figure 2.7 shows respondents' accommodation preferences by whether they had stayed in or visited someone staying in hospital in the past five years. As very few respondents said they would prefer to stay in a large ward of more than six people or that they did not know what type of accommodation they would prefer, these categories are not shown on the chart.
2.32 As can be seen from Figure 2.7, experience of hospital accommodation makes little difference to accommodation preference. For example, there does not appear to be any difference in preference of staying in a single room by experience of hospital accommodation. However, there is a greater tendency for both those who have stayed in hospital and those who have visited hospital to express a preference for staying in a multi-bedded ward of up to six, though these differences are not great.
Figure 2.7 Preferred type of accommodation by experience of hospital accommodation
Base: All respondents (990)
2.33 Respondents were also asked to give their reasons for their stated accommodation preference. This was an open-ended question so respondents spontaneously gave any reason they chose and were allowed to give more than one reason. We are therefore confident that the responses to this question represent the immediate rather than considered factors that are important to people when they think about staying in hospital.
2.34 The main reason given by those respondents who said they would prefer to stay in single room accommodation was privacy, with having or enjoying privacy mentioned by 79% of those who would prefer this type of accommodation. Eight percent of respondents mentioned not liking noise or noisy people and a further 8% mentioned that peace and quiet was important when one was ill. Smaller proportions of respondents mentioned other reasons including less risk of infection in a single room, that they didn't mix well with others or that a better standard of care would be available in a single room.
2.35 For those respondents who would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward of up to six people, the most common reason for this preference was having company or someone to talk to, which was mentioned by 81% of these respondents. All other reasons were mentioned by fewer than 5% of respondents and included it being boring in a single room, that you would get more attention in a multi-bedded ward and that it would stimulate well-being.
2.36 As previously mentioned, very few people would prefer to stay in a large ward of more than six people but for the 3% of the sample who expressed this preference the reasons given were very similar to those given by respondents who would prefer to stay in a small multi-bedded ward.
2.37 The most common reasons given by those who didn't mind what sort of accommodation they would stay in (27% of the sample) were that they didn't mind as long as they got good care (40%) or that they were not fussy/not bothered (24%). Despite saying that they didn't mind, 18% of this group said that they liked company or someone to talk to, suggesting that although they say they don't mind they would prefer not to be accommodated in a single room. All other reasons were given by less than 5% of this group and included that 'you should be glad to get a bed', that they 'don't mind as long as it's not a mixed ward' and that it would depend on the illness.
2.38 Finally, for the few respondents (6%) who said that 'It depends', the primary factor that they thought would be important was the type of illness for which they were being admitted. Other factors mentioned were that: respondents believed that if they were seriously or terminally ill they would prefer a single room; that it depended on what was available at the time; and that they would not want a mixed ward.
Perceived advantages and disadvantages of different types of accommodation
2.39 Another objective of the research was to examine the perceived benefits and risks associated with accommodating people in single or multiple occupancy accommodation. Asking respondents to give reasons for their preferred type of accommodation allowed us to probe the spontaneous 'top line' advantages of different types of hospital accommodation. We then asked respondents more directly to consider the advantages and disadvantages of different types of accommodation, without prompting.
2.40 Firstly, we asked what respondents thought were the advantages for in-patients staying for one or more nights in a single room in hospital. Respondents were allowed to give as many benefits as they wanted and were encouraged to answer as fully as possible, however, they were not prompted. Figure 2.8 shows the most common responses to this question.
2.41 The most commonly mentioned advantage was more privacy, which was perceived as a benefit by three quarters of the sample. Just over one third of the sample mentioned less noise as a benefit of staying in a single room. Other perceived benefits, mentioned by less than 10% of the sample, included single rooms giving you more dignity, and having your own bathroom. These benefits also, to an extent, relate to privacy.
2.42 Fewer people mentioned advantages like single rooms making it easier to talk about your condition or other confidential matters, the fact that you would not disturb others and being able to choose whether to watch and what to watch on television. A full list of responses to this question is given in Appendix 2.
Figure 2.8 Advantages of staying in a single room
Base: All respondents (990)
2.43 There was a slight tendency for women to mention each of the top three advantages compared to men: privacy was mentioned by 77% of women compared with 73% of men; noise by 37% of women compared with 31% of men; and dignity by 12% of women compared with 6% of men. This is consistent with a greater percentage of men saying that they did not mind what sort of accommodation they stayed in.
2.44 Those aged 65 and over were less likely to mention privacy (mentioned by 59%) and noise (mentioned by 28%) than any other age group. This age group was also most likely to say that there were no advantages or they did not know of any advantages, with 20% doing so. This is consistent with older age groups more frequently expressing a preference for multi-bedded wards - although we will explore the effect of preference in greater detail below.
2.45 There were very few differences in terms of other demographic variables, although those who worked in hospitals or visited hospitals in the course of their work were more inclined to say that privacy was an advantage (85%) than those who did not (74%) and indeed more likely to mention this than any other single group.
2.46 There was very little consistent difference by area, although those in the East/South were slightly less likely to consider less noise to be an advantage (27%) compared to those in the North (35%) or West (40%) of Scotland.
2.47 There was very little difference in responses from those who have stayed in hospital in any type of accommodation in the past five years versus those who have not. However, less noise was mentioned by more than 41% of those who had stayed in hospital as an in-patient compared with 35% of those who had not. Due to the small numbers involved it is difficult to comment on any differences by the type of accommodation stayed in with any confidence.
2.48 There were a few differences between those who had visited someone staying in hospital in the past five years and those who had not. Those who had were slightly more likely to mention privacy which was mentioned by 77% of visitors compared with 69% of non-visitors. Although, due to small numbers we cannot comment with confidence on differences by the type of accommodation that was visited, there appears to be a trend that less noise was more often mentioned as an advantage by those who had visited someone in a single room compared with those who had visited someone in another type of accommodation or who had not visited at all.
2.49 When we look at perceived advantages of single rooms broken down by the type of accommodation that people would prefer to stay in, there is a clear pattern. Those who would prefer to be accommodated in a single room were more likely to mention almost every advantage than those who expressed another preference. Figure 2.9 shows the top four advantages by preferred accommodation. As so few respondents (3%) said that they would prefer to stay in a large ward with more than 6 beds, these responses have been combined with those saying they would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward of up to six people.
Figure 2.9 Perceived advantages of single room accommodation by preferred type of accommodation
Base: All respondents (990)
2.50 Some of the key things shown in the chart are the fact that those who would prefer to stay in single room accommodation see greater advantages than those expressing a different preference. Every person who expressed a preference for single room accommodation named at least one advantage of this type of accommodation whereas nearly one in five of those who would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward or who didn't mind which type of accommodation they stayed in said there were no advantages to single room accommodation.
2.51 Here, we continue to see the pattern of those who say they do not mind in what sort of accommodation they stay giving similar responses to those who say they would prefer to stay in multi-bedded wards. This suggests that these two groups may be similar.
2.52 We also asked respondents what they thought were the disadvantages to in-patients staying in single room accommodation. As with advantages, a small number of categories come through strongly and we will concentrate on these as small numbers prevent detailed analysis of the other categories. A full list is available in Appendix 2. Figure 2.10 shows the most common responses.
2.53 The two disadvantages most commonly mentioned - isolation or lack of company which was mentioned by 69% of respondents and too quiet which was mentioned by 13% - are, in a sense, mirror images of the advantages, privacy and less noise. Twelve percent of respondents mentioned a concern that staff might forget about you or not check on you as much if you were in a single room. Nearly one fifth of the sample did not mention any disadvantages relating to single rooms. No more than 2% of respondents mentioned any other disadvantage.
Figure 2.10 Disadvantages of staying in a single room
Base: All respondents (990)
2.54 There were no real differences by gender or social class, though there was some variation by age. For example, those aged 16 to 24 and those aged 65 and over were slightly less likely to mention feeling isolated (mentioned by around 65%) compared to those aged 25 to 34 and 55 to 64 (mentioned by around 75% of these groups).
2.55 There was some variation by geographic area. Those in the West of Scotland were most likely to see a lack of company as a disadvantage (73%), followed by those in the North (69%), and those in the East/South (65%). Additionally, those in the East/South were more likely to mention single rooms being too quiet or having less going on as a disadvantage (17%) compared to both those in the West and those in the North (11% in each area mentioned this).
2.56 Those who worked in a hospital or visited a hospital in the course of their work were more likely to mention any disadvantage, with 88% doing so. This was particularly evidenced by 81% saying that people in single rooms could feel isolated. As this group were also more likely to mention advantages of single room accommodation, this may reflect a more in depth knowledge of the different aspects of hospital accommodation.
2.57 Having stayed in different types of hospital accommodation in the past five years also appeared to affect responses. Sixty nine percent of those who had not stayed in hospital thought that being isolated would be a disadvantage of staying in a single room. However, only 62% of those who had actually stayed in a single room saw this as a disadvantage compared with around 75% of those who had stayed in any type of multi-bedded room. Those who had stayed in a single room were also less likely to mention any disadvantage (around a quarter said there were no disadvantages) compared with those who had not stayed in hospital (20% saw no disadvantage) or those who had stayed in a multi-bedded ward (around 15% saw no disadvantage).
2.58 This pattern was not evident for those who had visited a person staying in hospital in the past five years. Those who had not visited were less likely to see disadvantages of staying in single room accommodation (23% saw no disadvantage) compared with those who had visited someone (19% of those visiting a person in a single room and around 17% of those visiting a person in a multi-bedded room saw no disadvantage). Those who had not visited someone were also less likely to say that isolation was a disadvantage (63%), compared with those who had visited (71% visitors to a single room and around 73% visitors to a multi-bedded room).
2.59 These results suggest that the patient experience of single rooms is more positive than it is perceived to be by those who either visit people in hospital or who work in or visit hospitals during the course of their work. However, it is important to remember that, of those who have stayed in a single room in the past five years, three quarters did see disadvantages in this type of accommodation and their primary concern was isolation or a lack of company. However, as we did not ask about advantages and disadvantages for respondents personally, this finding could relate to how they objectively saw this type of accommodation for people in general, rather than concerns they had for themselves specifically.
2.60 Figure 2.11 shows disadvantages of single rooms by preferred accommodation. Once again, it is evident that those who would prefer to stay in a single room are more likely to say there are no disadvantages with this type of accommodation (29%) compared with those who expressed any other preference and in particular those who would prefer to be accommodated in a multi-bedded ward (only 8% of these respondents saw no disadvantages). Those who would prefer to stay in a single room were also less likely to say that isolation or a lack of company (56%) or single rooms being too quiet (8%) were disadvantages compared with other respondents.
Figure 2.11 Perceived disadvantages of single room accommodation by preferred type of accommodation
Base: All respondents (990)
2.61 We then asked respondents what they would say were the advantages for in-patients staying one or more nights in a multi-bedded ward of up to six people or a large ward with others. Again respondents were allowed to give more than one advantage and were not prompted in their answers. The main advantages are shown in Figure 2.12.
Figure 2.12 Advantages of staying in a multi-bedded ward
Base: All respondents (990)
2.62 The biggest perceived advantage of staying in a multi-bedded ward was having more company and not feeling isolated and this was mentioned by 78% of the sample. Twelve percent of respondents said that they thought that staff were more likely to notice that you need help and 10% said that staff were not liable to forget you or more liable to check on you. No more than 2% of respondents mentioned any other advantage (a full list is given in Appendix 2). Fourteen percent of respondents said that there were no advantages to staying in a multi-bedded ward or that they would prefer to be on their own.
2.63 There were no differences in the responses by gender or social class. There was some variation by age, but this did not relate to the main advantage (more company and lack of isolation) and the differences are unlikely to be significant. There were no differences in terms of working in a hospital or visiting one in the course of one's work.
2.64 There was some variation by geographic area in relation to the main disadvantages. Those in the West of Scotland were most likely to see having more company and not feeling isolated as an advantage (82%), followed by those in the North (77%) and those in the East/South (73%). This follows the previous responses in relation to perceiving a lack of company as a disadvantage of single room accommodation. Those in the North were more likely to mention staff being more likely to notice you need help as an advantage (17%) compared to those in the East/South (13%) or West (9%).
2.65 There were no real differences in perceived advantages by those who had stayed in hospital in the past five years compared with those who had not. However, if we look at this by type of accommodation stayed in, those who had stayed in a single room were less likely to say that more company was an advantage (mentioned by 72%) compared with those who had stayed in a multi-bedded room (around 85%).
2.66 Those who had visited someone in hospital in the past five years showed the same pattern of results as those who had stayed in hospital in the past five years, whereas those who had not visited were less likely to mention any of the advantages and more likely to say there were no advantages.
2.67 If we look at perceived advantages of a multi-bedded ward by preferred type of accommodation, we see a similar pattern as for single room accommodation. Those who would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward saw greater advantages overall compared with those who would prefer to stay in a single room. Only 6% of those who would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward said there were no advantages to this type of accommodation compared with nearly one quarter of those who would prefer to stay in a single room.
2.68 Those who would prefer single room accommodation were also far less likely to say that having more company or someone to talk to is an advantage - 67% of this group gave this response compared with 89% of those who would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded room. There were no other differences between these groups in terms of which advantages were mentioned.
2.69 It is interesting to note that those who said they did not mind what sort of accommodation they stayed in again gave similar responses to those who would like to stay in multi-bedded accommodation adding weight to the argument that these groups are similar.
2.70 Finally, we asked about the disadvantages of staying in a multi-bedded ward. Only two disadvantages were mentioned by more than 8% of the sample. Fifty six percent of respondents said that less or no privacy would be a disadvantage and 48% that multi-bedded wards being noisier would be a disadvantage. This indicates that, while people are just as likely to see disadvantages of multi-bedded accommodation compared with single room accommodation, there is less agreement about what the disadvantages actually are.
2.71 There was no variation by gender. Those aged 35 to 44 were more likely than average to mention that a lack of privacy was a disadvantage (mentioned by 68% of this age group), particularly in comparison with those aged 65 and over who were much less likely than average to see this as a disadvantage (only 42% mentioned this). There was also no real variation by age in terms of seeing noise as a disadvantage.
2.72 Concern about privacy varied considerably by social class. Those in the AB group were particularly likely to mention this disadvantage (mentioned by 69%) compared with those in the C1C2 groups (mentioned by 56%) and those in the DE group (mentioned by 48%).
2.73 In terms of geographic area, those in the East/South were slightly less likely to mention either of these disadvantages compared to other areas. A lack of privacy was mentioned by 52% of those in the East/South compared to 57% of those in the West and 60% of those in the North, while noise was mentioned by 42% of those in the East/South compared to 52% of those in the West and 48% of those in the North.
2.74 Those who worked in or visited hospitals during the course of their work were more likely to see lack of privacy as a disadvantage, with 69% of this group mentioning it compared to 55% of those who did not work in or visit hospitals for work. Again this could reflect greater objective consideration of different types of accommodation.
2.75 There were no differences between the disadvantages perceived by those who had stayed in hospital at all compared with those who had not stayed in hospital at all although those who had stayed in a single room were more likely to mention lack of privacy as a disadvantage (mentioned by 62%) compared with those who had stayed in multi-bedded wards (mentioned by around 50%).
2.76 There were no real differences between the disadvantages perceived by those who had visited someone in hospital in the past five years compared with those who had not; neither did this vary by the type of accommodation they had visited.
2.77 As with the previous questions, preferred type of accommodation had an effect on the perceived disadvantages of multi-bedded wards. The results are shown in Figure 2.13.
Figure 2.13 Perceived disadvantages of multi-bedded wards by preferred type of accommodation
Base: All respondents (990)
2.78 Those who preferred to stay in a single room were less likely to say that there were no disadvantages of multi-bedded accommodation, with 10% of this group saying so, compared with 19% of those who would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward or who did not mind what accommodation they stayed in.
2.79 Privacy was a big concern for those who would prefer to stay in a single room (mentioned by 70%) compared with those of those who would prefer to stay in a multi-bedded ward (42%) or who did not mind what accommodation they stayed in (49%). However, there was little difference in the perception of noise as a disadvantage.
2.80 Once again, those who said that they did not mind what type of accommodation they stayed in responded in a similar way to those who would prefer to stay in multi-bedded accommodation. We would speculate that this pattern could be connected to the fact that, as people believe multi-bedded wards to be the most common type of hospital accommodation, they expect to be accommodated in this type of ward. They therefore look for advantages and disadvantages that complement their expectations.
Who should stay in single versus multiple occupancy accommodation?
2.81 A further objective of the research was to explore people's opinions on who should be accommodated in single occupancy hospital accommodation. Respondents were told that not all hospitals had single rooms for every patient. They were then asked, without prompting, firstly, who they thought should generally stay in a single room and secondly, who they thought should generally stay in a multi-bedded room or large ward. They could give more than one answer if they chose.
2.82 The most common responses to these questions are discussed below. Figure 2.14 shows the groups that people thought should be accommodated in a single room.
Figure 2.14 Who should stay in a single room?
Base: All respondents (990)
2.83 At first glance, there does not seem to be much agreement about which groups should be accommodated in a single room. However, closer inspection suggests that severity of illness has been used as a criteria to make this judgement, with this being reflected in each of the four most common responses (and possibly with older people also being equated with having more serious illness).
2.84 The groups that most people thought should stay in single room accommodation were those who are seriously ill (mentioned by 57% of the sample) followed by those who are dying (27%). One quarter of the sample thought that those who had an infectious disease should be accommodated in a single room and 18% thought that people in intensive care should stay in a single room. Older people were mentioned by 14% of respondents while 11% said that they either didn't know who should stay in a single room or that no one should.
2.85 Despite the fact that around four in ten respondents expressed a preference to stay in a single room, only around one in ten of the whole sample thought that everyone should stay in single room accommodation. This may indicate that there was an acceptance that not everybody could or should stay in this type of accommodation, regardless of their preference.
2.86 There were no differences by gender, and while there were some fluctuations with age, all age groups placed the different groups in the same order of who should stay in a single room. Those in the AB groups were much less likely than other groups, particularly those in the DE group, to say that those who were seriously ill should stay in single rooms (47% of ABs compared with 64% of DEs). However, as this was an unprompted question, this does not necessarily mean that they thought that people in these groups should not stay in single rooms.
2.87 There was some variation by area. Respondents in the West were considerably less likely to say that everybody should stay in a single room (5%) compared to those in the East/South and North (17% and 15% respectively). Respondents in the East/South were less likely to say that those who were seriously ill (40%) and those who were dying (19%) should stay in a single room compared to other areas (those who were seriously ill were mentioned by 69% of respondents in the West and 57% in the North and those who were dying by 33% in the West and 27% in the North).
2.88 Although there is no definitive explanation for these results without further research, we could speculate that they could reflect the fact that those in the East/South (as mentioned above) had slightly less experience of visiting people in hospital and therefore of which groups generally stay in different types of accommodation.
2.89 There were no real differences in the results of those who had stayed in or visited someone staying in hospital in the past five years and those who had not. However, those who had visited their children in hospital in the past years were more likely to say that children should stay in a single room compared to those who had not (12% of those who had compared with 3% of those who had not).
2.90 Figure 2.15 shows the groups that people thought should be accommodated in a multi-bedded ward or large ward.
Figure 2.15 Who should stay in a multi-bedded ward?
Base: All respondents (990)
2.91 Again, despite the immediate appearance of little agreement on which groups should stay in multi-bedded accommodation, severity of illness seems to have been used as a criteria to make this judgement. Twenty seven percent of the sample mentioned that people who are in hospital for a routine procedure should stay in this type of accommodation. Fifteen percent of the sample thought that children should stay in multi-bedded wards and 12% mentioned teenagers and young adults. This could also be linked to severity of illness as people tend to think of these groups as 'healthy'. Seventeen percent said that either no one should stay in this type of accommodation or that they did not know who should.
2.92 Twenty six percent of respondents thought that everybody should stay in multiple occupancy hospital accommodation. This is more than double the 11% of respondents who thought everybody should stay in single room accommodation.
2.93 It is worth noting that, as people believe that multi-bedded rooms are the most common type of hospital accommodation, it may be difficult for them to consider which groups should stay in this type of accommodation. In a sense, it is the default option. This could explain the low proportion of the sample mentioning each individual group, and the relatively high proportion saying that they don't know who should stay in this type of accommodation.
2.94 Again, there were no differences by gender. Although there was some variation by age, all age groups placed the different groups in the same order of who should stay in a multi-bedded ward. The exception to this was those aged 65 and over who were more likely to say that everybody should stay in multi-bedded wards (mentioned by 31%).
2.95 Respondents in the North were more likely to say that everybody should stay in a multi-bedded ward (37%) compared to those in the East/South (25%) or those in the West (22%). Conversely those in the North were less likely to mention children (10%) or teenagers and young adults (5%) compared to those in other areas (children were mentioned by 15% in the West and 18% in the East/South; teenagers were mentioned by 12% in the West and 18% in the East/South). Respondents in the West were considerably more likely to say that those who were in hospital for a routine procedure should stay in a multi-bedded ward (37%) compared to those in the East/South (16%) or North (23%). This could be seen as complementary to the fact that respondents in the West, as described above, were most likely to think that single rooms should be reserved for those who are seriously ill or dying.
2.96 There were no real differences between the results of those who had stayed in or visited someone staying in hospital in the past five years and those who had not. However, those who had visited their children in hospital in the past five years were less likely to say that children should stay in a multi-bedded ward (14% of those who had visited their children compared with 22% of those who had not) and less likely to mention teenagers and young adults (9% compared with 15%).