A Healthwatch in Sussex report on Non-Emergency Patient Transport Services

Key findings include: 

• Overall satisfaction with the service has fallen since our 2020 NEPTS survey by 16.5 percentage points. In 2025, 62% of respondents were either ‘very satisfied’ or ‘satisfied’ with their experience of using the patient transport service since 1st April 2025 compared with 78.5% in 2020 (38% were unsatisfied or very unsatisfied, compared with 21.5% in 2020).
• The number of people who would recommend the service to families and friends has also fallen since our 2020 survey by 18 percentage points. In 2025, 68% of our respondents would be ‘very likely’ or ‘likely’ to recommend the service to family and friends compared to 86% in 2020.
• Respondents were asked if they felt the service had declined, improved or stayed the same since 1st April 2025. Of those that had used the service before the 1st April 2025, 30% of our respondents felt the patient transport service has declined, 27% felt the service has stayed the same and 15% of respondents felt the service had improved since the 1st April 2025.
• In terms of delays, changes or problems with journeys, only 27% of respondents had not experienced any delays, changes or problems. This is an increase to 2020, when 37.5% told us they had not experienced any delays, changes or problems.
• 23% of respondents had frequently experienced delays, changes or problems with their journeys since 1st April 2025, and 41% had occasionally experienced delays, changes or problems with their journey.
• The most frequently experienced issue around delays was a delayed pick up from hospital. Of 78 responses, only 5% had ‘never’ experienced a delayed pick up from hospital. 22% had experienced delayed picks ups ‘often’, and 46% had experienced delayed pick-ups regularly. While we recognise that patient perceptions of 'delay' may not always align with the contractually agreed-upon terms, the high frequency of reported issues—specifically with 46% of respondents citing regular delays— 4 indicates a potentially significant gap between contractual compliance and patient experience.
• Another issue of concern raised by respondents in relation to problems, delays and changes to journey was ‘being taken or collected in a taxi rather than a specific patient transport service vehicle’. 55% of respondents told us they had experienced this either ‘very often, often or rarely’ (Of 115 respondents). Open comments also identified the use of taxis as an issue of concern.
• Our respondents’ overall experience of applying for patient transport was mixed. 26% of respondents reported finding it ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’ to apply for the service, 18% found it ‘neither easy nor difficult’ to apply and 16% found it ‘difficult’. Positive comments about the application process included ‘helpful call handlers’ and ‘generally finding it easy to apply for’. Challenges patients faced included being told the service was at full capacity and respondents’ personal needs not being taken into account.
• When it came to booking patient transport service journeys, the majority of respondents did not want any additional help or support to book journey’s (67%). Of those that did want some additional help or support, 13% were interested in a physical leaflet to help them book a journey.
• Use of the EMED online booking system ‘The Patient Zone’ was very low. 73% of respondents were not aware of the Patient Zone and of the 27% who were aware of it, only 38% had used the Patient Zone.
• Conversations with staff at the Royal Sussex County Hospital (RSCH) and Bexhill Hospital also identified concerns with patient transport, with staff saying that they felt that the service has declined since EMED has taken over the contract. Concerns raised by staff were about the impact of afternoon/ evening delays for patient pick up for hospital staff who have to wait until patients are collected, concerns around one company EMED subcontracts too (OnCue transport) and finding booking generally to be less flexible, especially with return journeys.