— By the Orcas Medical Foundation —
“Nobody really knows,” says Dr. Julie Gottman, well-known psychologist and researcher, and board member of the Orcas Medical Foundation (OMF), “because nobody’s ever asked the residents before—not in a detailed, systematic way that provides data we can analyze. There have been lots of discussions about medical care on the island, but not a formal survey of the residents who actually use the system.”
That situation is about to change. Dr. Gottman, with input from the members of the OMF board, Orcas Island Fire & Rescue, and others, has developed a rigorous survey that she hopes will be completed by everyone on the island. “We need to hear from the whole community, every corner, about experiences they’ve had with our medical system, and how their needs have been met or not met.”
“We have a sense of some areas of need,” she continues, “like after-hours care, mental health care, and round-the-clock care during rehab. But we want to know what particular kinds of problems people are struggling with, like orthopedic problems, chronic illness, accidents, or seizures, for example. Results will be totally confidential; no individual results will be disclosed.”
Results will be used to begin improving island medical services—helping to determine, for example, whether to have medical specialists visit the island regularly to see patients, and which specialists; which urgent care services need to be strengthened; and whether children are being adequately served. Results will be shared publicly in articles in local news media.
Kevin O’Brien, OIFR chief, helped to develop the survey and is very interested in the results. “OIFR is the first responder to many urgent care needs on the island. The results of this survey will be a tremendous help to us in planning our future emergency services. Through partnerships and collaboration, Orcas Island can become a model community for wellness.” Hilary Canty, executive director of the Community Foundation, adds, “Once we identify the specific needs facing islanders, I know this community can work together to provide options and creative solutions.”
Participation is totally anonymous, and surveys may be found at several locations on Orcas or taken online
Each family member is asked to fill out a separate survey. The survey is available either on paper or online. The paper versions are available in many locations including the Orcas Medical Center, Orcas Family Connections, the Senior Center, Orcas library, Eastsound fire station, schools, the Funhouse, the Community and Episcopal churches, Eastsound and Deer Harbor Post Offices, Island Market, Ray’s Pharmacy, Orcas Spa & Athletics, the Village Stop and the laundromat and OPAL. Postage-paid return envelopes are provided.
The online version is available at https://orcasmedicalcenter.com/needs-assessment-form. You can also find a link to the online survey on the OMC website (https://orcasmedicalcenter.com).
Completing the survey takes about 15 minutes. The deadline for returning it is May 1. Says Dr. Gottman, “Because our community is diverse, the more people we hear from, the better, so everyone’s needs are represented. Please look for the survey, and take time to provide thoughtful answers. It’s so important in helping us to better help you.”
**If you are reading theOrcasonian for free, thank your fellow islanders. If you would like to support theOrcasonian CLICK HERE to set your modestly-priced, voluntary subscription. Otherwise, no worries; we’re happy to share with you.**
I have read the Survey and Leif’s response. It appears to me
that the Survey is ignoring the medical practices of Dr. Russell and Dr. Shinstrom by slanting the questions towards the Medical Center. When you ask a question which includes the term “Other” it implies we versus someone or something else. To be fair, Survey is a good idea but only if it treats all Medical Facilities on an equal basis.
As President of the Orcas Family Health Center, a true non-profit providing health care for all, I would challenge your statements that no survey has ever been done. It has and I have personally attended and participated in public forums and discussions on Orcas
several times over the past 35 years I have been here.
Problems have been vocalized, surveys taken and OFHC has spent thousands of dollars to treat and care for many here who could not afford this care. We have received little cooperation from the Medical Center
Medical care here should not be a constant war among the various practices. What I do know is that we have provided 6,813 services to over 2,349 patients last year. I am very proud of Dr. David Shinstrom and our staff at Orcas Family Health Center.
In questions #11 and #21, the “truth table” of possible answers does not permit more than one “excellent” response, for instance to both OMC and the Fire Department’s EMT services.
In a couple of other questions, a numerical answer is expected by the survey (e.g., “2”), where I (and probably others) would normally answer with a word (e.g., “twice”).
To me, this indicates poor survey design.
I agree with the comments posted on this article. I thought Orcas had come a long way from the past animosity among medical providers. The survey was extremely disappointing. Its focus on the OMC to the exclusion of the other practices makes it useless as a tool that purports to evaluate Orcas Island’s medical needs. I found it poorly designed and heavily slanted towards positive evaluations of OMC, as the other commenters have said. In addition to its obvious and inexplicable bias, it was clumsy. For instance, the first question, asking if any of the listed areas were “concerns”, will not elicit clear information. What does “concern” mean? I wasn’t sure if it was asking whether I thought each area was something I am personally worried about in general, or was a lack on Orcas. The problems go on. The survey is not available at any of the medical practices other than OMC. I don’t know what OMC proposes to do with the data it gathers, but I am very disappointed and displeased with this very one-sided effort.
As some one who has attempted community needs assessment in the past, it is indeed a challenge to create the perfect survey tool. I appreciate this effort and look forward to learning the results. I am also looking forward to the Opportunity Council’s upcoming assessment and the one focused on seniors that a grad student intends to do soon. Having multiple tools and data sets will give us a deeper understanding of the needs facing our community. I encourage all islanders to participate in both filling out the (multiple)surveys and also in the discussions that will follow. Working together, we can create the solutions to meet the needs of islanders. This collaborative effort would be a great step towards getting beyond the animosity.
Thank you to those who responded to our article regarding the medical needs assessment survey reviewed above. First, regarding Steve Henigson’s comments, the questions he noted being limited to only one excellent rating was incorrectly described. In fact, each category of provider may be rated for level of satisfaction, so as many as three types of providers could potentially all receive “outstanding” ratings. Second, contrary to his perception, respondents have been shown to prefer to respond with numbers rather than a spelled out word, so the survey was designed accordingly.
Regarding the comments about medical practices other than OMC not being equally represented nor approached for distribution, fair enough. Dr. Gottman is a member of the Orcas Medical Foundation board which serves the OMC. As such, she is seeking information that can improve the services OMC provides, while also learning about the broader medical needs of our community.
Ken Speck mentions forums, discussions, and surveys done in the past, but in the last ten years, none have yielded detailed reliable and statistically analyzed data from a random sample of our population – the accepted standard for scientific validity. That’s what we are attempting with this survey.
There is certainly more information needed to deeply understand the needs of our community than this first survey can address. In fact, the more questions asked, the better. We invite all others to continue to question, to explore our community’s healthcare needs, and to generate new ways of serving the people of our beloved island.
This survey feels more like a poor attempt at marketing and fund raising by OMC than any real effort to elicit meaningful responses that would paint an accurate picture of the medical needs of Orcas Island. I found the prominently located “Donate” button to be especially egregious.
At a minimum OMC should take down the survey and do a little more testing. Several of the questions are formatted incorrectly with the radio buttons oriented incorrectly. Others are confusingly worded and one isn’t really sure what information is being asked for. The results from this survey are likely to be inaccurate and therefore shouldn’t be used for any planning purposes.
At best, the survey should be completely redone to be provider agnostic, hosted on a neutral site like Survey Monkey, and please, tested thoroughly. Even better would be to have the various stake holders involved in the survey design. If the true intent was gather meaningful data to try and formulate a plan for the future you’ve missed the mark by a very wide margin.
Just completed the survey.
This is not a broad spectrum survey concerning medical services on Orcas Island. This is a quality improvement and services steering survey for Orcas Medical Center. Rather disappointing actually, considering what the article states that it is. Had it been what it states, it might have been useful.
The results of this survey may have some benefit for those guiding operations at OMC, but for any other provider and/or Orcas EMS, I hope that any use of the data is limited.
One additional question:
Can you please direct me to the Spanish version of the survey so I can convey that on?
Thanks!
Ok. So now I am very confused.
The above comment is very clearly titled as though it is written by Julie Gottman. When I read it, it is very obviously NOT written by Dr Gottman.
Orcas Issues has a very well established policy of making sure the readers know who is commenting. The above post is deceptive, and at the very least, Dr Gottman should be aware that her name is being used to make rebuttal commentary in a public forum by someone other than her.
I had the same problem Steve Henigson noted in rating providers. Unless it has since been fixed, this aspect of the survey is exactly as he described it.
I gave up trying to complete the survey when I hit Section 5 (Urgent Medical Care), where I was asked which providers I have used for various services. I was unable to select multiple providers for each line item – it forced me to pick only one. This might be fine if I’ve only ever had one instance of each problem, but over the years, for example, I’ve seen different providers/services for different cuts/lacerations…
More thought on the survey design, and presumably analysis, seems indicated.
Julie Gottman says: “Ken Speck mentions forums, discussions, and surveys done in the past, but in the last ten years, none have yielded detailed reliable and statistically analyzed data from a random sample of our population – the accepted standard for scientific validity. That’s what we are attempting with this survey. ”
I’m curious – do you have your survey design available to look over? In particular, how are you getting a random sample of the population?
Brian Ehrmantraut says “I’m curious – do you have your survey design available to look over? In particular, how are you getting a random sample of the population?”
Clearly they don’t get a true random selection in the scientific use of the word. Instead what they get is a smattering of replies from several subsets of the island population.
Justin Paulsen says “The above comment is very clearly titled as though it is written by Julie Gottman. When I read it, it is very obviously NOT written by Dr Gottman.”
Look at the quotation marks. Leif quotes the portion which I presume to be written by Ms. Gottman which is the paragraphs titled Problem #2 and Problem #3. The rest of his comments are not within quotation marks and I presume to be his own writings.
First, thank you Ken Speck—we love what we do!
After I read in the December Chief’s Report from OIFR “Medical Care on Orcas Island: Staff from Orcas Island Fire and Rescue, Orcas Medical Center, the Senior Center, and the Orcas Island Community Foundation, have begun meeting as a workgroup to develop improvements to medical care on Orcas Island,” I sent an email to Chief O’Brien expressing that I was surprised to read that we were excluded from the workgroup since we have a panel of over 3,000 regular patients. Chief O’Brien did respond to both Dr. Shinstrom and me letting us know we could participate at future meetings if we wanted to.
Contrary to Dr. Gottman’s assertion that a survey of patients who use the current medical system has never been done, Orcas Family Health Center sent out its last survey in May 2010. Although it was not as exhaustive as the survey created by OMF, it directly asked patient’s how we were doing and how their needs could be better met. As a result, Dr. Shinstrom coordinated cardiology and dermatology specialists to see patients on Orcas.
After looking at the OMF survey, I agree with Justin Paulsen that it is more geared towards a quality improvement tool for OMC.
From that standpoint, it makes sense that the focus is on OMC. It also makes sense that the collaborating parties creating the survey did not include the other medical offices on Orcas. Perhaps we were generically grouped together as “other providers” and not named to be legally safe since we weren’t involved in the creation. That’s possibly why the surveys aren’t offered at our office either.
While we were discussing our thoughts about this article and the survey, Dr. Shinstrom said “the key issue is lack of cooperation and collaboration.” I have been involved in several “orcas improvement” workgroups as an Orcas Family Health Center representative and as a community member. I still feel disappointed that we weren’t invited to participate in this effort to evaluate medical care on Orcas Island.
I have to echo many of the sentiments in the above comments. I was disappointed when I saw the survey. It was my understanding the survey would look toward researching all medical care currently available,e on the island. This would include all forms of medical care (MD, chiropractic medicine, psychiatry, holistic medicine, etc) and agree it is slanted toward OMC. For that reason I have decided not to complete the survey. Not because I do not think they value my opinion, but because I felt misled. I will be happy to complete a OMC survey in the future; but would much prefer an independent researching firm design and oversee a more broad and equitable survey tool to assess all medical care on Orcas Island. I believe an outside firm might be able to get a more accurate assessment without bias that seems to exist here. I applaud the first effort and hope for something more in the future.
Congratulations for, first mislabeling a survey and once again under the label of OMF, stirring a pot that didn’t need to be stirred; second, for ignoring all the dedicated providers of small “m” medical services who provide a variety of health related services seldom found in a community this small; and third, following the example set by CenturyLink, asking the public to answer narrow based questions about a broad based subject, the obvious objective of which is to prove one’s own worth. Surveys are a very hard way to find out what people are thinking, and to make matters more complicated, surveys almost always reflect what people want, not what they need. When you are older than dirt you may want a half dozen fully staffed medical facilities but what you really need is a broad spectrum of health care providers including a quick response helicopter ride. Believe me, having used a number of them, I can truly say that we are lucky to live on Orcas Island. We don’t need a divisive survey but we could use a little more cooperation between our providers. It isn’t illegal, amoral or fattening to be receiving successful treatment from a provider other than OMF, including providers who practice things other than traditional Western Medicine.
Dare I comment that: until the medical profession as a whole can honor its’ Hippocratic oath and stop injecting people with vaccines that cause much ill health, and all the other devious mechanisms of administering “modern medicine”, we shouldn’t trust them at all..
The Mainstream Medical apparatus in this country is abhorrent, and if you have any sense you’ll do the research to make sure you are getting quality care.
Did you know Chemotherapy has around a (5%) success rate? Please avoid dying for Modern Medicine.
Jim,
The comment I was referring to that did not appear to be written by Dr Gottman is the one under the heading:
julie gottman on February 18, 2015 at 10:59 pm said:
There is a string of third person, non-possessive statements that make the comments appear odd if written by Dr Gottman herself. Perhaps I am wrong, but worthy of note.
I was a bit distracted by the question about establishing a hospital district and tax district. That did not work out very well on San Juan Island.