Waiting in A&E

Most people don’t like being made to wait, especially when they’re ill. Recently there has been a lot of news coverage of waiting times in A&E. People are supposed to be seen within 4 hours, but some are having to wait longer than that.

What are your experiences of waiting in A&E? Do you think you were made to wait too long, or were you seen quickly? Do you think you were given enough attention?

If you had to wait for a long time, how long did you have to wait? Why do you think you had to wait? Were there not enough staff? Were there patients in A&E who you didn’t think needed to be there, or who required a lot of attention because they were being abusive or violent?

Is there anything you think could be done to improve the experiences of patients in A&E?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ive only been once and think i waited about an hour or so to be seen about my broken wrist. Looking back it wasnt that bad given that there was about 15-20 people waiting but obviously at the time when you're in pain its different.

Personally though i feel that the NHS in general gets a lot of bad press for what is a FREE service. Id rather have to wait a bit longer than need insurance or not be able to go because i couldnt afford it.

I've been to A&E for a variety of reasons and from my experience waiting time tends to depend on how serious the issue is. Mild issues that have only brought me to A&E because nowhere else was open and it needed to be treated sooner than waiting the whole weekend have taken a couple of hours. By contrast, taking my toddler to A&E for breathing difficulties saw us waiting less than half an hour and having everything taken care of within 10 minutes including tests and prescription. I think people forget that even if they were waiting first there are problems that require more immediate attention and they definitely don't cut the staff enough slack. They do the best they can considering how overworked and underpaid they often are.

Waiting is good. It means you're not going to die. The person you need to feel sorry for is the one that gets rushed in and treated first. Personally I think people should get some perspective - it is a free service, as has already been pointed out, and everyone does get seen to.

MikeS wrote: »

Waiting is good. It means you're not going to die.

That's a pretty good way of looking at it actually! Though it did worry me when they saw my toddler almost immediately.

MikeS wrote: »

Waiting is good. It means you're not going to die. The person you need to feel sorry for is the one that gets rushed in and treated first. Personally I think people should get some perspective - it is a free service, as has already been pointed out, and everyone does get seen to.

Would you be saying that if you were seriously ill?

Melian wrote: »

Would you be saying that if you were seriously ill?

I think his point was that if you were seriously ill you would get seen quicker, which is usually the case.

For the most part, I haven't had bad experiences with the waiting times in A&E. I've usually been seen and triaged quickly and the wait has been due to mental health services and the wait to see the on call doctor for an assessment. I don't blame A&E staff in the slightest for this as they have treated me and addressed the psychical side (if relevant).

Having said that, a few months ago I had an accident which meant I was rushed into hospital on a spinal board. My vital signs were a bit iffy - I had a suspected head injury and fractured neck and I kept being sick and losing consciousness. Considering I was taken in as a medical emergency, I wasn't expecting to wait over 5 hours to be seen by a doctor and a total of 12 hours for a CT scan. I'm told that I should have been on 10 minute obs but that manifested as more than an hour and a half.

I wouldn't be alive if it wasn't for the NHS. There are problems with it but it needs to be remembered that every single day lives are saved by staff working ridiculous hours and being grossly underpaid. As with anything, if money is removed from a service, there will be consequences and the simple fact is that the NHS cannot continue to run at a functional capacity without the necessary funds. That isn't the fault of staff, people from CEO down to HCAs are doing their best with few resources. The government can complain about waiting times being missed - and it isn't just A&E departments, it is across the NHS - but until they reinvest nothing will change. Of course people go to A&E when they can't get a GP appointment. By removing trained nurses from the 111 service, of course the instant reaction will be "go to hospital" if self care or a pharmacy isn't suitable. Until the government wake up to that fact, nothing will change.

Melian wrote: »

Would you be saying that if you were seriously ill?

My point is that the people who need to be seen first, usually are. So, in the grand scheme of things, is waiting time really a big deal? I get it's frustrating at the time. But the reality is you're being seen to for free, they're doing the best they can, and like it or not some people are going to need treatment more urgently than you.

MikeS wrote: »

My point is that the people who need to be seen first, usually are. So, in the grand scheme of things, is waiting time really a big deal? I get it's frustrating at the time. But the reality is you're being seen to for free, they're doing the best they can, and like it or not some people are going to need treatment more urgently than you.

When you're seriously ill, it is. My dad was sent to the hospital by his GP one morning. By 1pm, he was seen by a junior doctor. By 6pm, he hadn't been admitted and discharged himself. He went up the next day and was finally admitted the following evening. His appendix had burst.

Melian wrote: »

When you're seriously ill, it is. My dad was sent to the hospital by his GP one morning. By 1pm, he was seen by a junior doctor. By 6pm, he hadn't been admitted and discharged himself. He went up the next day and was finally admitted the following evening. His appendix had burst.

Apologies if I'm missing something - surely discharging himself didn't do him any favours? If you were sent to the hospital the most logical thing is to stay there until you know you're okay to leave. I get that he waited a long time, but if the wait time is a bigger deal to you than getting yourself sorted out then I find it hard to blame the NHS.

MikeS wrote: »

Apologies if I'm missing something - surely discharging himself didn't do him any favours? If you were sent to the hospital the most logical thing is to stay there until you know you're okay to leave. I get that he waited a long time, but if the wait time is a bigger deal to you than getting yourself sorted out then I find it hard to blame the NHS.

He'd been waiting several hours and still hadn't been assessed. What else was he meant to do? Him and mum had been up since some ridiculous time due to being night workers.

They'd been there since around 10.30am, saw a junior doctor at 1pm and still hadn't been admitted by 6pm. And that was a normal weekday. (so, not a bank holiday, etc)

Melian wrote: »

He'd been waiting several hours and still hadn't been assessed. What else was he meant to do? Him and mum had been up since some ridiculous time due to being night workers.

They'd been there since around 10.30am, saw a junior doctor at 1pm and still hadn't been admitted by 6pm. And that was a normal weekday. (so, not a bank holiday, etc)

Okay, I understand where you're coming from. :chin: I stand by my original point, though.

I've had my fair share of A&E visits, and I've often seen straight away, or have less than an hours wait, when cops bring me, I don't have to wait at all xD

WayneS wrote: »

Most people don’t like being made to wait, especially when they’re ill. Recently there has been a lot of news coverage of waiting times in A&E. People are supposed to be seen within 4 hours, but some are having to wait longer than that.

What are your experiences of waiting in A&E? Do you think you were made to wait too long, or were you seen quickly? Do you think you were given enough attention?

If you had to wait for a long time, how long did you have to wait? Why do you think you had to wait? Were there not enough staff? Were there patients in A&E who you didn’t think needed to be there, or who required a lot of attention because they were being abusive or violent?

Is there anything you think could be done to improve the experiences of patients in A&E?

It will never change, you forget the party that is in power. Doctors, nurses and others complain about the wastage such as doctor appointments that go unattended, but if they address these problems the tories will just make further cutbacks.

Politicians want the NHS to fail because all their friends have shares in it when it is privatised. Things might change when Labour are elected. Labour were propping the recession up. I spent a week in a mental health unit. It was called a 'hospital' but it was more like a prison.

It's going to get worse, because this government want the NHS to be run like a business, where everything is about profit not helping people get better. Bring on the revolution.

Lexi99 wrote: »

Ive only been once and think i waited about an hour or so to be seen about my broken wrist. Looking back it wasnt that bad given that there was about 15-20 people waiting but obviously at the time when you're in pain its different.

That's a good point. Waiting an hour doesn't feel as bad afterwards when you're feeling better as it does when you're there in pain and uncertain about the extent of the problem.

Myskaria wrote: »

I've been to A&E for a variety of reasons and from my experience waiting time tends to depend on how serious the issue is. Mild issues that have only brought me to A&E because nowhere else was open and it needed to be treated sooner than waiting the whole weekend have taken a couple of hours. By contrast, taking my toddler to A&E for breathing difficulties saw us waiting less than half an hour and having everything taken care of within 10 minutes including tests and prescription. I think people forget that even if they were waiting first there are problems that require more immediate attention and they definitely don't cut the staff enough slack. They do the best they can considering how overworked and underpaid they often are.

I suppose when somebody goes to A&E, their problem is the most serious from their perspective. How did you ffeel about waiting a couple of hours? Was that okay or too long?

WhispersOfTheHeart wrote: »

I've had my fair share of A&E visits, and I've often seen straight away, or have less than an hours wait, when cops bring me, I don't have to wait at all xD

Do you think it is fair that if somebody comes to A&E with the police they get seen more quickly? Should A&E stafff see the presence of the police as an indication that the problem is urgent, or should they make their decisions based on the criteria they would use with other patients?

WayneS wrote: »

That's a good point. Waiting an hour doesn't feel as bad afterwards when you're feeling better as it does when you're there in pain and uncertain about the extent of the problem.

I suppose when somebody goes to A&E, their problem is the most serious from their perspective. How did you feel about waiting a couple of hours? Was that okay or too long?

At the time it feels like forever because you're bored or worried about how serious the injury might be. Looking back though, I recognise and accept none of my problems were serious issues and that life threatening conditions take priority. I don't remember feeling particularly annoyed about having to wait. I just felt relieved when my problems were dealt with and I've almost always had top notch care at A&E so the wait time is usually worth it.

WayneS wrote: »

Do you think it is fair that if somebody comes to A&E with the police they get seen more quickly? Should A&E stafff see the presence of the police as an indication that the problem is urgent, or should they make their decisions based on the criteria they would use with other patients?

I think that varies though, for example someone who had minor cuts after a fight, who could potentially be dangerous to other people would need to be kept out of the public eye. Or even if that person was a danger to themselves and disrupting the waiting room, which might lead people who are already in the waiting room for gosh knows whatever reason to feel vulnerable themselves. Even if they aren't treated but are like given there own room. But they may as well treat them sooner than later, so you've got it out the way, which is also clearing a room, if one was to be taken up.

Also, you can't really see the severity of some issues until they've had tests done, for example if someone was to take an overdose, it varies from body to body, so some could respond more severely and others not as severely, but you can't test how sever the issue is until you've done a blood test, and you don't want to leave it to late encase the person takes a turn for the worst, but again, it might not com across as severe at first, but surely, police have bought someone in for a specific reason, and because they need immediate medical care, or they would of just taken them to the station.

Correctmondo?

WhispersOfTheHeart wrote: »

I think that varies though, for example someone who had minor cuts after a fight, who could potentially be dangerous to other people would need to be kept out of the public eye. Or even if that person was a danger to themselves and disrupting the waiting room, which might lead people who are already in the waiting room for gosh knows whatever reason to feel vulnerable themselves. Even if they aren't treated but are like given there own room. But they may as well treat them sooner than later, so you've got it out the way, which is also clearing a room, if one was to be taken up.

Isn't a problem with treating aggressive patients more quickly that it rewards their aggression? If they were more calm like the other patients, they may not be treated as quickly.aggressive

Whowhere wrote: »

If they based it on how serious or not serious the injuries are, then not only are you tying up A and E resources with a potentially dangerous individual, you are also tying up the resources of 2 cops and however many security guards may be needed.
I believe (although I am biased) having a potentially dangerous criminal/suspect who may be intoxicated present in an A and E department is an issue waiting to happen. Better to get them seen and out the way.

Wouldn't it be better to give police stations good enough medical facilities so that those people weren't sent to hospital?

WayneS wrote: »

Isn't a problem with treating aggressive patients more quickly that it rewards their aggression? If they were more calm like the other patients, they may not be treated as quickly.aggressive

Wouldn't it be better to give police stations good enough medical facilities so that those people weren't sent to hospital?

But the police could take them back to the station if they thought there injuries were only superficial and didn't need quick treatment.

Last two times I've been in A&E I haven't had to wait at all.
Most recently, my nipper had bronchiolitis and was seen immediately. I expect that baby's with breathing difficulties are a priority.
And the time before that was because I'd been stabbed and so was obviously a priority as well.

I do remember as a kid though being in A&E after having almost severed a finger with an under-lever air rifle, one guy turning up with conjunctivitis, something that really didn't require a visit to A&E.

Quick Links