Analysis of Factors Affecting Patient Satisfaction
- 23 Downloads
Patient satisfaction is regarded as an important indicator in assessing the quality of care. Over the past 20 years, in particular, there has been increasing interest in patients’ perceptions about the provision of healthcare. Although asthma is a disease that increases the burden on health expenditure and has high cost requirements, there have been few studies evaluating the views of asthma patients about their treatment. The aims of this study were to identify factors affecting the satisfaction of asthma patients and to contribute to the sparse literature on this topic.
The study sample consisted of 387 asthma patients who were referred to Hacettepe University’s Chest Diseases Polyclinic and Allergy Unit in Ankara, Turkey, between August 2000 and March 2001. A questionnaire consisting of 66 questions was developed to explore demographic characteristics (11 questions), quality of life (32 questions), severity of disease (2 questions), and patient satisfaction with the care received (21 questions). The items for the satisfaction part of the questionnaire were selected from three separate questionnaires used in three independent studies, including the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire. Factor analysis was performed on the satisfaction items, which revealed five dimensions in which the items were grouped: (i) doctor competency; (ii) provision of information; (iii) quality of care; (iv) waiting time; and (v) hospital quality. The general reliability coefficient was 0.87. Regression analyses were carried out to determine how patient’satisfaction with their medical treatment was affected by the following variables: demographic characteristics (age, other diseases, sex, education, duration of treatment), severity of disease, quality of life, whether medical tests were performed, and whether treatment was received from academic physicians (professors and associate professors) or from consultants and assistants.
The results of the regression analyses revealed that patients who had undergone medical tests or who had received treatment from academic physicians (rather than from consultants or assistants) had higher satisfaction levels than their counterparts. Furthermore, female patients had higher levels of satisfaction than their male counterparts. In addition, it was found that the five satisfaction dimensions were all significantly correlated with each other and that patients’ general satisfaction was also significantly correlated with all five satisfaction dimensions. The percentages of patient satisfaction that were likely to be explained by the variables used in the study were 22.7% for doctor competency, 25.6% for provision of information, 46.2% for quality of care, 13.7% for waiting time, and 9% for hospital quality. Overall, 32.4% of satisfaction was explained by the variables used in the study.
The fact that only 32.4% of general patient satisfaction was explained by the variables used in the study indicates that there are still very important gaps in our understanding of factors affecting patient satisfaction. This study found that the levels of patient satisfaction with care were influenced by provider characteristics (academic status) rather than patient characteristics. After controlling for patient characteristics, patients of professor and associate professor physicians were more satisfied than patients of assistant physicians, especially in regard to doctor competency, quality of care, provision of information, waiting time, and overall satisfaction. Medical education should continue to emphasize the importance of these aspects of the physician-patient encounter. A qualitative approach could be used in further research to investigate the variance that cannot be explained by other models.
KeywordsAsthma Patient Satisfaction Asthma Patient Satisfaction Level Medical Test
The authors gratefully acknowledge Dr Fuat Kayoncu and colleagues at Hacettepe University’s Chest Diseases Polyclinic and Allergy Unit (Ankara, Turkey) for their assistance throughout the project. Funding for this project was provided by Hacettepe University. The authors have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this study.
- 3.McGuire A. Measuring performance in the health care sector: the hows. In: Andersen TF, Mooney G, editors. The challenges of medical practice variation. London: Macmillan Press Ltd, 1990: 95–116Google Scholar
- 5.Weingarten SR, Harris J. Update: clinical outcomes management and measurement. Perspectives in medical management 94. Tampa (FL): American College of Physician Executives, 1994Google Scholar
- 7.Ford RC, Bach SA, Fottler MD. Methods of measuring patient satisfaction in health care organizations. Health Care Manag Rev 1997; 22(2): 74–89Google Scholar
- 12.Cleary PD, Keroy L, Karapanos G, et al. Patient assessment of hospital care. QRB Qual Rev Bull 2000; 15(6): 172–9Google Scholar
- 13.Fitzpatrick R. Measuring measurement of patient satisfaction. In: Hopkins A, Costain D, editors. The outcomes of medical care. London: Royal College of Physicians, 1990: 19–26Google Scholar
- 18.Blanc PD, Katz PP, Henke J, et al. Pulmonary and allergy subspecialty care in adults with asthma: treatment, use of services, and health outcomes. West J Med 1997; 67(6): 398–407Google Scholar
- 19.Christian RD. Health resources use and outcomes in patients with asthma [thesis]. Ann Arbor (MI): University of Michigan, 1997Google Scholar
- 22.Kalyoncu AF. Bronş Astmasi. Ankara: Türkiye Akciger Hastaliklari Vakfi Yayinlari No: 4, 1996Google Scholar
- 25.US Department of Health and Human Services. Practical guide for the diagnosis and management of asthma [online]. Bethesda (MD): National Institutes of Health; 1997 Oct. NIH Publication No. 97-4053. Available from URL: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/prof/lung/asthma/practgde/practgde.pdf [Accessed 2006 Feb 10]Google Scholar
- 27.Esatoglu AE. Hastanelerde Hasta Tatminin Hastane Yönetimi Açisindan Degerlendirilmesi ve Kullanimina Yönelik Model Önerisi, Yayinlanmamiş Doktora Tezi, H.Ü. Saglik Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara, 1997Google Scholar
- 43.Sahin B, Tatar M. Factors affecting use of resources for asthma patients. J Med Syst. In pressGoogle Scholar
- 48.Ahonen A, Leinonen M, Pesonen MR. Patient satisfaction with Easyhaler compared with other inhalation systems in the treatment of asthma: a meta-analysis. Curr Ther Res 2000; 60(2): 61–73Google Scholar
- 60.Cunningham L. The quality connection in health care: integrating patients satisfaction and risk management. Oxford: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1991Google Scholar