Assessment of satisfaction with pharmaceutical services in patients receiving antiretroviral therapy in outpatient HIV treatment setting
- 443 Downloads
Background The patient’s perception and satisfaction are increasingly considered as a useful factor in the assessment of competency of health care providers and quality of care. However, these patient focused assessments are largely ignored when assessing health care outcomes. Objective The study assessed the perception and satisfaction of patients receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART) with pharmaceutical services received in outpatient HIV treatment settings. Setting Seventeen HIV treatment centres in Nigeria. Methods This cross-sectional survey included 2,700 patients randomly selected from 26,319 HIV patients on ART, who received pharmaceutical services in the study setting. A study-specific Likert-type instrument was administered to the participants at point of exit from the pharmacy. Midpoint of the 5-point scale was computed and scores above it were regarded as positive while below as negative. Chi-square was used for inferential statistics. All reported p values were 2-sided at 95 % confidence interval (CI). Main outcome measure Patient satisfaction with pharmaceutical services. Results Of 2,700 patients sampled, data from 1,617 (59.9 %) were valid for analysis; 62.3 % were aged 26–40 years and 65.4 % were females. The participants had received pharmaceutical services for a mean duration of 25.2 (95 % CI 24.3–26.1) months. Perception of participants regarding the appearance of pharmacy was positive while that regarding the pharmacists’ efforts to solve patients’ medication related problems was negative. The participants’ rating of satisfaction with the waiting time to access pharmaceutical services was negative; the satisfaction decreases with increasing waiting time. However, the satisfaction with the overall quality of pharmaceutical services received was rated as positive; 90.0 % reported that they got the kind of pharmaceutical services they wanted; 98.2 % would come back to the pharmacy if they were to seek help again and would recommend services to others. The level of satisfaction was found to be associated with educational status of the participants (p = 0.006) unlike age, sex, marital and employment status. Conclusion The satisfaction with overall quality of pharmaceutical services received by participants was positive. Longer waiting times resulted in lower patient satisfaction. High patient load may be the cause of the long waiting time and the inadequate duration of interaction between pharmacist and the patient.
KeywordsHIV/AIDS Nigeria Patients Perception Pharmaceutical care Satisfaction Services
We wish to acknowledge all staff of HU PACE in Nigeria and USA who have supported in the implementation of the pharmacy component of the GHAIN Project. We also acknowledge the contribution of focal pharmacists who supported the direct provision of pharmaceutical care to patients in the health facilities.
Support for this paper was provided by Global HIV/AIDS Initiative in Nigeria (GHAIN) with funds from the US President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEP-FAR) through US Agency for International Development (USAID) Cooperative Agreement No. 620-A-00-04- 00122-00. The views expressed in this publication are that of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of FHI360 and Howard University Pharmacists and Continuing Education (HU PACE) Center.
Conflicts of interest
The author(s) declare that they have no competing interests.
- 2.Donabedian A. The role of outcomes in quality assessment and assurance. Qual Rev Bull. 1992;18:356–60.Google Scholar
- 12.Oparah AC. Pharmaceutical care concept, philosophy, competency and benefits. In: Oparah AC, editor. Essentials of pharmaceutical care. Lagos, Nigeria: ACybex publication; 2010. p. 21–39. ISBN: 9789783840195.Google Scholar
- 13.Volume CI, Farris KB, Kassam R, Cox CE, Cave A. Pharmaceutical care research and education project: patient outcomes. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2001;41(3):411–20.Google Scholar
- 14.Erah PO, Nwazuoke JC. Identification of standards for pharmaceutical care in Benin City. Trop J Pharm Res. 2002;1(2):55–66.Google Scholar
- 16.Swift BG. Barriers to pharmaceutical care in the home care setting. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1993;50:1611–4.Google Scholar
- 20.Hanan M, Karp P. Customer satisfaction: how to maximize, measure, and market your company’s “ultimate product”. New York, NY: American Management Association; 1989. p. 7. ISBN-10: 0814477720.Google Scholar
- 26.Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978. ISBN: 0070474656, 9780070474659.Google Scholar
- 27.Field A. Discovering statistics using SPSS for windows. London–Thousand Oaks–New Delhi: Sage; 2000. p. 446. ISBN: 0761957545.Google Scholar
- 29.Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data analysis. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1987. p. 149.Google Scholar
- 31.Abdosh B. The quality of hospital services in eastern Ethiopia: patient’s perspective. Ethiop J Health Dev. 2006;20:199–200.Google Scholar
- 32.American Pharmacists Association (APhA). Principles of practice for pharmaceutical care. 2005. http://www.pharmacist.com/principles-practice-pharmaceutical-care. Accessed 20 May 2013.
- 33.American Society of Hospital Pharmacists. ASHP statement on pharmaceutical care. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1993;50:1720–3.Google Scholar
- 34.American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. ASHP guidelines on the provision of medication information by pharmacists. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 1996;53:1843–5.Google Scholar
- 35.Troutman WG. Consensus-derived objectives for drug information education. Drug Inf J. 1994;28:791–6.Google Scholar
- 36.George D, Mallery P. SPSS for windows step by step: a simple guide and reference. 11.0 update. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 2003. p. 231. ISBN: 0205375529, 9780205375523.Google Scholar
- 37.Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. ISBN: 0199231885, 9780199231881.Google Scholar
- 38.Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research applications to practice. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 2000. p. 560–7. ISBN: 0838526950, 9780838526958.Google Scholar