Saint Louis University
Baguio City
Philippines
“Satisfaction with Health Service Utilization at a Private Hospital’s OutPatient Department: A Cross-sectional Study”
Submitted by:
Banawol, Ji-ilhan L.
Capuyan, Jamie Joy L.
De la Cruz, Ma. Sophia Catrina B.
Govindaraju, Chetana
Hernal, Criselita S.
Jonatas, Rose Ann S.
Mil, Ma. Selene B.
Taccayan, Joyanne Mae G.
Tomboc, Jessa Maine T.
Research Adviser:
Dr. John Anthony Domantay, MD. FPSP
INTRODUCTION
In a period where majority of hospital funds comes from patients, attention is currently
focused on patient’s satisfaction especially among private hospitals. Patient’s satisfaction is one
of the hospital’s service quality parameter, where policy makers and administrators base their
judgement on the current policies and processes that circulates in the hospital. (10) Knowledge
of patient’s satisfaction with the service can serve not only as a performance indicator but also as
identifying markers for areas of improvement to provide better care and service for the
betterment of the patients. (9)
Hospitals serves as sanctuary for the sick, unstable and dying. However, in the past,
hospitals were seen as scary and unfriendly places; a confusing, expensive, unreliable, and often
impersonal disassembly of medical professionals and institutions. In an article last 2005,
hospitals were compared to a luxurious car, a sign for its unreasonable overpricing, waste, and
out-dated engineering. Others compared it to a wild beast, a sign of aggressiveness and
arrogance. (10)
Recent investigators had examined the effect of patient’s satisfaction on the improvement
of patient’s treatment outcome. Low-perceived quality of care leads to poor compliance with
treatment and advice, failure to pursue follow-up care and dissuading others from seeking care,
while high patient’s satisfaction leads to better health outcome.
Recent studies linked patient’s satisfaction to the expectations, past experiences, current
needs, and a unique personal preference of the patients. (12) However, there are no studies that
clearly show the cause- and- effect of patient’s responses. (9) It may be affected by the patient’s
perceived adequacy of communication, physical comfort and family participation in the decision
making. It may also be affected by their age, race, sex, and severity of illness. (8)
In line with these, the study aims to identify the satisfaction among patients in a private
hospital’s out-patient department, specifically on areas of physical layout and structures,
services, and amenities provided by the hospital and also to identify relationship between the
patient’s response and their demographic profile.
METHOD
Study Design
The study utilized a cross-sectional design wherein a self-administered questionnaire was
used by researchers to draw patients’ satisfaction to the Outpatient Department (OPD) health
care services of a private hospital in Baguio City, Philippines.
Setting
The researchers conducted the study in a level IV private hospital’s Outpatient
Department (OPD). The researchers followed the necessary protocols in order to conduct the
study in the said institution. Permissions were asked and received from the hospital director and
hospital administrator through a communication letter. Moreover, to attain a statistical data of
the OPD, the researchers asked for the permission of the OPD head as well. A courtesy call to
the OPD nurses was done before floating the questionnaires. A patient’s approval was solicited
prior to answering the questionnaire. Each participant was asked to sign a constructed Informed
consent written in English and Filipino to ensure understanding of the document.
The data collection was conducted at the Medicine, Surgery and OB outpatient
departments. Medicine and Surgery OPD is located adjacent to the Emergency room while OB
OPD is located near the pharmacy. Three researchers were assigned at the OB OPD while 6
researchers were assigned at the Medicine and Surgery OPD. It was conducted during office
hours, from 8:00 am to 10:30 am and 1:30 pm to 3:00 pm (except Wednesdays), on weekdays of
December 2013.
Participants
The study included “new” or “referred” patients of the Outpatient Department (Medicine,
Surgery, and Obstetrics departments only), who completed consultation, with ages 18 to 65 years
old either male or female regardless of their chief complaint, with sound mind, not in a situation
where his or her understanding or mental faculty is compromised, and has the capacity to decide
independently. They were randomly selected and served as respondents of the study.
Variables
The variables were the OPD’s physical appearance and layout; process of
getting/securing the hospital record; personnel (doctor, nurse); availability, affordability, and
quality of medicines; the laboratory procedures and other diagnostic procedures; availability of
other diagnostic procedures inside the hospital; and the services/ amenities rendered.
The participant’s sociodemographic information was taken to correlate them with the
above mentioned variables. This included the age, gender, educational attainment, civil status,
department consulting and occupation.
Data sources/ measurement
A pre-tested questionnaire, written in English and Filipino, was utilized. It had three
general parts: (1) general data of the client, (2) patient satisfaction dimensions that composed of
40 items answered by selecting either  for satisfied or  for not satisfied, and (3) patient
perception which comprised 18 items, emphasizing the importance of some amenities provided
by the OPD.The pre-tested questionnaire was again modified to suit the respondents and local
conditions.
Bias
The patients were randomly selected and were asked permission to participate in the
study. The patients were instructed that the answers will be treated confidentially and the results
may be helpful for the improvement of the OPD before signing the informed consent. Each
participant was requested to sign a constructed Informed Consent written in English and Filipino
to ensure understanding of the document. The respondents were encouraged to answer the
questionnaire completely and were permitted to answer in private. They were advised to ask
questions to the researchers whenever necessary in order to avoid misinformation. The
questionnaires were checked after for any missed question. Those that were not answered
completely were treated as null and void.
The study excluded patients aged 17 and under as well as those who were aged 66 and
above. Accident, medico-legal and emergency cases as well as third party responders (those who
answer in behalf of the patient) were not included in the study.
Also, follow-up patients
attending the OPD and patients working in the health care facility, or in any way associated with
the institution such as instructors and students, were excluded from the study.
Study size
The population size of OPD patients under the departments of Medicine, Surgery and
Obstetrics were taken from the same month of December for the past four years (2009 to 2012)
since questionnaires were floated on December 2013. The mean from the three departments was
used to calculate for the sample population utilizing the Open Epi software. Therefore, a sample
size for frequency in a population of 125 was attained, with a confidence interval of 95% and 5%
margin of error.
Statistical methods
The data gathered were tabulated in a Microsoft Excel worksheet with respective codes
for every category or question on the topmost row of cells and beneath each were the answers
given by the 125 participants wherein  was translated as 1 and as 0. It was considered since
quantitative measures would usefully supplement and extend the qualitative analysis. Data
management and analysis was performed on the worksheet using the Epi Info ver7 software
which is a data collection, management, analysis, visualization, and reporting software for public
health professionals. It was used in this study for epidemiologic analysis by transforming data
and performing many types of statistical analyses. Discrete data were analyzed by entering the
worksheet into the program and allowing it to read and identify the parts of the worksheet. A
successful reading allowed the researchers to gather statistical data and records in terms of
frequency distribution, percentage, and Pearson's Chi-square test for normal distribution. The
program’s Frequency command was used for frequency of satisfied and not satisfied or
important and not important along with their respective percentages in terms of satisfaction and
importance. Further analysis was done using the Tables command to display the variable’s
percentage of satisfaction in association with the demographic data. The confidence limit of
frequencies was at 95% and P values <0.05 were considered significant.
All incomplete data from participants were considered null and void and were
supplemented by gathering new data from a randomly selected patient.
RESULTS
There were 125 patients that participated in this study conducted last December 2013 at
SLU-Hospital of the Sacred Heart Out Patient Department that were screened and selected by
random sampling.
Frequencies were analyzed at 95% confidence limits. The demographic profile is shown in
Table 1.
Table 1: Demographic Profile
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
Age
- 18-20 years
- 21-30 years
- 31-40 years
- 41-50 years
- 51-60 years
- 61-65 years
Gender
- Male
- Female
Educational Attainment
- College Graduates
- High School Graduates
- Elementary Graduates
- Others
Civil Status
- Single
- Married
- Widow
Department Consulting
- Internal Medicine
- Obstetrics
- Surgery
Occupation
- Government Employee
- Private Institution Employee
- Self-employed
- Unemployed
- Others
FREQUENCY
PERCENTAGE (%)
18
41
20
21
11
14
14.4
32.8
16.0
16.8
8.8
11.2
30
95
24.0
76.0
55
37
14
19
44.0
29.6
11.2
15.2
53
66
6
42.2
52.8
4.8
80
39
6
64.4
31.2
4.8
6
23
28
52
16
4.8
18.4
22.4
41.6
12.8
Frequencies were analyzed at 95% confidence limits. As shown in table 2, 81.70 % of the
respondents are generally satisfied.
Table 2: Satisfaction of Respondents
HEALTH CARE SERVICE QUALITY FREQUENCY
DIMENSION
n=125
PERCENTAGE
SATISFACTION
(%)
Physical appearance and of the
Outpatient Department
- Cleanliness
- Lighting
- Availability of trash cans
- Security
- Comfort
- Toilet Facility
- Ventilation
- Availability of waiting chairs
- Waiting area
Process of getting/ securing the Hospital
Records
- Waiting time to get records
- Waiting time to see the Doctor
Personnel:
Doctor-Patient Relationship
Satisfied:
106
119
118
112
110
107
105
104
94
84
Satisfied:
85
94
75
Satisfied:
116
Not satisfied:
19
6
7
13
15
18
20
21
31
41
Not satisfied:
40
31
50
Not satisfied:
9
- Cordiality
- Willingness to help
- Politeness
- Patience
- Clarity of advice
- Temperament
- Sensitivity
- Clarity of instructions
- Doctor’s Explanation
Personnel:
Nurses
- Politeness
- Patience
- Cordiality
- Temperament
- Willingness to help
- Nurse’s Explanation
- Approachability
- Sensitivity
Medicines
119
119
118
118
116
115
113
113
112
Satisfied:
111
114
113
113
113
111
110
108
102
Satisfied:
82
93
71
6
6
7
7
9
10
12
12
13
Not satisfied:
14
11
12
12
12
14
15
17
23
Not satisfied:
43
32
54
Satisfied:
104
112
Not satisfied:
21
13
-
Availability
Affordability
Laboratory
work-ups
diagnostic procedures
- Availability
and
other
84.71
95.2
94.4
89.6
88.0
85.6
84.0
83.2
75.2
67.2
68.0
75.2
60.0
92.8
95.2
95.2
94.4
94.4
92.8
92.0
90.4
90.4
89.6
88.8
91.2
90.4
90.4
90.4
88.8
88.0
86.4
81.6
65.6
74.4
56.8
83.2
89.6
- Procedural steps
- Accessibility
- Lab fee
Availability of other Diagnostic workups inside the hospital
- Operational X-ray machines
- Availability of X-ray, CT-scan,
Ultrasound
- Location of diagnostic rooms
- Scheduling of diagnostics
- Comfortability of waiting area
- Fee of diagnostics
112
111
82
Satisfied:
111
120
118
13
14
43
Not satisfied:
14
5
7
89.6
88.8
65.6
117
114
110
87
8
11
15
38
93.6
91.2
88.0
69.6
88.8
96.0
94.4
The table below illustrates that most amenities in the hospital are important for the
respondents.
Table 3. Respondent’s Perspective on Importance of OPD’s Facilities and Services
Services/amenities
Cleanliness
Trash cans
Lighting
Waiting area
Comfort rooms
Treatment room
Information
Divider/curtain for privacy
Ventilation
Waiting chairs
Security guards
Instruction posters
Directory map
Canteen
Guides/personnel
Air-conditioning system or electric fan
Drinking water
Television on waiting area
Frequency
N=125
125
124
123
122
122
121
120
120
119
119
118
118
116
112
111
104
103
86
Importance percentage
(%)
100.00
99.20
98.40
97.60
97.60
96.80
96.00
96.00
95.20
95.20
94.40
94.40
92.80
89.60
88.80
83.20
82.40
68.80
It is apparent from table 2 that majority of the respondents are satisfied with the physical
layout and structure of the Hospital’s OPD section.
Areas with the least percentage of satisfaction are the waiting area (67.2%), waiting time to
see the doctor (60%), affordability of medicines (56.8%), lab fee (65.6%), fee of diagnostics
(69.6%).
As seen in Table 3, the Television in the waiting area is of least importance among others
with a percentage of 68.8%, and cleanliness is considered important by every respondent.
Analysis showed that there was a significant positive correlation between respondent’s level
of satisfaction and their demographic profile in some parameters of the study.
Statistical tests revealed an association between the respondent’s satisfaction on cleanliness,
lighting, availability of waiting chairs, and toilet facility with their gender. It shows that females
were more sensitive to these areas than males. An association with the respondent’s educational
attainment and satisfaction with the toilet facilities were also found.
Further Analysis showed that college graduates tend to have lesser patience than high school
graduates and elementary graduates.
DISCUSSION
Key results
This study set out with the aim of assessing the importance of the relationship between
the level of satisfaction of health service utilities & patient experience. This was done by
determining: (1) the overall satisfaction of the respondents and (2) the respondent’s perspective
on the importance of the OPD’s Facilities and Services. Its initial objective was to determine the
access and satisfaction levels of clients, especially in the out-patient department, on health
services, facilities, human resource and other resources and to determine the difference on level
of satisfaction of clients with regards to their age, sex, civil status and hospital department
visited.
The overall result of this study shows that most respondents reported as being satisfied of
having variable degrees of satisfaction with regards to age, gender, educational attainment, civil
status, department consulting and occupation.
Limitations
Due to financial and time constraints (1) it only tackles the satisfaction of the OPD
patients in only one local hospital, (2) the sample size utilized was only based from a one month
average of patients and not from the entire OPD population seeking consult in the chosen
hospital, (3) certain departments were excluded, namely: Pediatric, ENT, and Orthopedic
departments, and (4) age was also limited from 18 to 65 years old. The study excluded patients
aged 17 and under as well as those who were aged 66 and more. Accident, medico-legal and
emergency cases as well as third party responders (those who answer in behalf of the patient)
were not included in the study due to its potential bias as patients are not directly receiving care
from the health care team, particularly the doctors & nurses. Also, follow-up patients attending
the OPD and patients working in the health care facility, or in any way associated with the
institution such as teachers and students, were excluded from the study.
Interpretation
The research came across with many confounding variables. A major theme in the
reviewed literature is the complexity of capturing a measurement of patient satisfaction that will
accurately inform quality care improvement measures. That is, individual patient satisfaction
reports may be mediated by other variables. (13) The variables of the study were as follows: age,
gender, educational attainment, civil status, department consulting and occupation.
Though all results showed to be satisfactory, the doctor-patient relationship demonstrated
the highest satisfaction rate out of all the other health service utilities. The doctor–patient
relationship has been, and remains to be, a keystone of care: the medium in which data are
gathered, diagnoses and plans are made, compliance is accomplished, and healing, patient
activation, and support are provided. (14) This reveals that the doctors of the hospital have
provided the utmost quality care given that achieving health & satisfaction is considered as the
ultimate validator of quality care.
Findings show that the affordability of medications was satisfactory, but had scored the
most number of non- satisfactory ratings. This could be due to the socioeconomic state of the
patient consulting in the OPD. Low-income consumers have to make difficult decisions every
day to prioritise their spending: buying food, clean water, paying for energy or sending their
children to school. In fact, people living in poverty are active money managers who apply a
variety of financial strategies to stretch their small and often irregular incomes (15);though,
pharmaceutical industry stresses that medicines alone cannot solve the underlying problems of
poverty, inadequate public healthservices or lack of healthcare personnel and infrastructure that
beset developing countries. (16)
These results were consistent with those of a previous study conducted by Cuevas which
showed that most respondents are generally satisfied with the services offered by an institution.
Adjustment for variables that predict patient satisfaction scores is vital in gaining an accurate
measure of patient satisfaction. Research suggests that there are core issues such as compassion
and care delivery, problems with information and education, coordination of care, respect for
patients’ preferences, emotional support, involvement of family and friends, continuity and
transition, physical comfort, empathy, and personalized therapy that affect patient satisfaction
across all clinical settings. (13)
Generalisability
Most studies rely on multiple criteria of patient satisfaction for quality
measurements. To date there is no single universal method for measuring patient satisfaction. In
previous studies, they found that there is an agreement that the definitive conceptualization of
satisfaction with healthcare has still not been achieved and that understanding the process by
which a patient becomes satisfied or dissatisfied remains unanswered suggesting that satisfaction
is a relative concept and that it only implies adequate services. (1)
Funding
Funds were taken from the researchers’ own pocket. The breakdown of funds was as
follows:
Quantity
Item
Amount
2rims
Bond paper
P300.00
Printing, editing, photocopy
P1000.00
Communication expenses
P500.00
TOTAL:
P1,800.00
CONCLUSION
This study indicates that the respondents are generally satisfied in terms of physical
appearance and lay-out, accessibility, medicines, laboratory work-ups, and other diagnostic
work-ups inside the hospital provided by the Out Patient Department of a private hospital. It also
specifies that majority of the respondents are satisfied with the health personnel’s who attended
to their consulting medical needs, and that majority of the respondents deemed the importance of
the Out Patient Department’s facilities and services.
Given the claim that patient complaint and satisfaction data is useful for quality
improvement in care, it is applicable to compare patient satisfaction to researches that examines
the quality improvement measures implemented in response to patient satisfaction reports and
the impact of those measures on subsequent patient satisfaction measures. Results of such
research would be very useful in the identification of the impact of patient satisfaction and
complaint data on quality improvement strategies in the Out Patient Department.
Evaluating outpatient department as a whole, it can be recommended that the department
needs to introduce some simple changes to improve the patients’ satisfaction. These include the
following: (1) simple changes in the physical structure of the OPD especially with regards to the
waiting area and increase the number of waiting chairs, (2) change the process of processing of
records to make it more accessible and faster to access, (3) increase the number of doctors
manning the OPD or decrease the workload of the doctors and other medical staff so they can
give more attention and time to the patients, (4) inform the patients regarding the medicines
available in the hospital and give them alternatives if it is out of their budget, and (5) change in
the laboratory setup for it to be more accessible and provide alternatives and offer assistance if
the patient cannot afford the test he or she needs.
The researchers recommend that further studies should be made with the following
additional parameters: (1) a whole year evaluation of the outpatient department, (2) include all
the departments of the OPD, (3) increase number of evaluated patients and (4) come up with a
questionnaire that can also be applicable to pediatric patients or can be answered by the caregiver
of the pediatric patients.
References:
1. Assefa F, Mosse A, Hailemichael Y. Assessment of Client’s Satisfaction with Health
Service Deliveries at Jimma University Specialized Hospital. Ethiop Journal of Health
Science. 2011 July. 21 (2): 101-109.
2. Cuevas, JP. Patient Satisfaction on Health Care Services Provided by the Zamboanga
City Medical Center Out Patient Department. Ateneo de Zamboanga University. 2008.
3. Grogan S, Conner M, Norman P, Willits D, Porter I. Validation of a Questionnaire
measuring patient satisfaction with General Prcatitioner Services. Quality in Health Care
2000. 9: 210-215.
4. Ige OK, Nwachukwu CC. Areas of Dissatisfaction with Primary Health Care Services in
Government Owned Health Facilities in a Semi-Urban Community in Nigeria. Journal of
Rural and Tropical Public Health. 2010 (9): 19-23.
5. Kumari R, Idris MZ, Bhushan V, Khanna A, Agarwal M, Singh S. Study on Patient
Satisfaction in the Government Allopathic Health Facilities of Lucknow District, India.
Indian Journal of Community Medicine. 2009 January. 34 (1): 35-42.
6. Marshall GN, Hays RD. The Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire Short-Form (PSQ-18).
California 2005.
7. Pearse J. Review of Patient Satisfaction and Experience Surveys conducted for Public
Hospitals in Australia: A Research Paper for Steering Committee for the Review of
Government Service Provision.
8. Weingart S, Odelya P, Sands D, Li J, Aronson M, Davis R, Phillips R, Bates D. Patientreported Service Quality on a Medicine Unit. International Journal for Quality in Health
Care. 2006 Novemeber. 18 (2): 95-101.
9. Tso I, Ng S, Chan W. The Development and Validation of the Concise Outpatinet
Department User Satisfaction Scale. International Journal for Quality in Health Care.
2006 May. 18 (4): 275-280.
10. Torcson P. Patient Satisfaction: the Hospitalist’s Role. The Hospitalist: an official
publication of the Society of Hospital Medicine. 2005 Aug.
11. Hansen P, Peters D, Viswanathan K, Rao K, Mashikoor A, Burnham G. Client
Perceptions of the Quality of Primary Care Services in Afghanistan. International Journal
for Quality in Health Care. 2008 September. 20 (6): 384-391.
12. Morris B, Jahangir A, Sethi M. Patient Satisfaction: An Emerging Health Policy Issue,
What the Orhopaedic Surgeon Needs to Know. AAOS Now. 2013 June.
13. Debono D, Travaglia J., Complaints and patient satisfaction: a comprehensive review of
the literature, National Library of Australia, 2009
14. Goold S, Lipkin MJ.The Doctor-Patient Relationship. Jan 1999; 14 (1): S26–S33.
15. Cleary P, McNeil B. Patient Satisfaction as an Indicator of Quality Care. 1988
Spring;25(1):25-36.
16. Haupt, S., Krumer, A., Bringing Medicines to Low-income Markets, Berlin, 2012
17. Novartis: Access to
Medicines in the Developing World. Retrieved from:
http://www.novartis.com/downloads/corporate-responsibility/access-tohealthcare/Access-Medicines.pdf November 2005
APPENDIX A: Informed Consent and Questionnaire (English Version)
INFORMED CONSENT
We, the third year medicine students of the School of Medicine – Saint Louis University are
conducting a research titled “Level of Satisfaction with Health Service Utilization at the SLU-Hospital of
the Sacred Heart-Out Patient Department”
We would like to ask for your kind participation in the said research to complete it, the results of
which could be useful for future betterment in Services at the SLU- HSH. All data collected will be
treated confidentially and it is not required for the patient to mention his/ her name. Hence the
treatment or Health services provided by the Hospital to the participant will not be affected in any
manner.
Thank you.
Yours Truly,
The Reseachers:
Banawol, Ji-ilhan L.
Capuyan, Jamie Joy L.
De la Cruz, Ma. Sophia Catrina B.
Govindaraju, Chetana
Hernal, Criselita S.
Jonatas, Rose Ann S.
Mil, Ma. Selene B
Taccayan, Joyanne Mae G.
Tomboc, Jessa Maine T.
Approved by:
Dr. John Anthony Domantay, MD, FPSP
Research Adviser
General Information
Name (Optional): _______________________________
Instruction: Please put an (×) the appropriate box for your answer.
⎕ 18-20 ⎕21-30 ⎕31-40 ⎕41-50
⎕51-60 ⎕61-65
Gender:
⎕Male
⎕Female
Civil status:
⎕Single ⎕Married ⎕Widow
Department Consulting: ⎕Internal Medicine
⎕OB-Gyne ⎕Surgery
Occupation:
⎕Government Employed
⎕Private Employee
⎕Self-employed
⎕Unemployed
Age:
Educational Attainment:
⎕College Graduate
⎕Elementary Graduate
⎕High School Graduate
⎕Others:________________________
Signature:
______________________________
Questionnaire
A. Instruction:
Please evaluate the listed items to indicate how satisfied you are with them as a
customer. Check (√) the corresponding icon of your choice.
The
icon will indicate that you are satisfied with the service.
The
icon will indicate that you are not satisfied with the service.
Health Care Service Quality Dimension
Level of Satisfaction
Satisfied
1. The physical appearance and layout of
the outpatient department
a. Cleanliness
b. Lighting
c. Comfortable
d. Security services
e. Availability of Waiting chairs
f.
Toilet Facility
g. Available trashcans
h. Ventilation System
i.
Space of waiting area
2. The process of getting/ securing the
hospital record
a. Waiting time to get records
b. Waiting time to see the doctor
3. Personnel (doctors, nurses)
A. Doctors-patient relationship
a. Cordiality of doctors
b. Politeness of doctors
c. Temperament of doctors
d. Patience of doctors
e. Sensitivity of doctors
f.
Willingness to help patient
g. Clarity of Instructions given by the
doctor
Not satisfied
h. Clarity of advice given
i.
Doctor’s explanation to queries of
patient
B. Nurses
a. Cordiality of nurses
b. Approachability of nurses
c. Nurses willingness to help
d. Politeness of nurses
e. Temperament of nurses
f.
Patience of nurses
g. Sensitivity of Nurses
h. Nurses’ explanation to queries of
patient
4. Medicines
a. Availability of Medicines
b. Affordability of Medicines
5. Laboratory Work-ups and other
diagnostic procedures
a. Accessibility to the laboratory
(distance)
b. Availability of laboratory tests
c. Procedural steps to access laboratory
tests
d. Laboratory fee
6. Availability of other diagnostic work-ups
inside the hospital
a. Availability of X-ray, Ultrasound and
CT-Scan services
b. Location of CT-Scan, X-ray and
Ultrasound rooms
c. Scheduling of procedures for CT scan
and ultrasound
d. X-ray machines are operational
e. Comfort of waiting area for X-ray
f.
Fee of radiologic procedures
B. Importance Aspect: evaluate the following services/amenities according to your perceived
importance of the service. Check (√) the corresponding icon of your choice
The
icon will indicate that the amenities are important.
The
icon will indicate that the amenities are not important.
Services/ Amenities
1. Treatment/ dressing Room
2. Waiting Area
3. Ventilation
4. Lighting
5. Comfort Rooms
6. Security Guard
7. Trash cans
8. Cleanliness of the area
9. Information counter
10. Air-conditioning/ Electric fans
11. Television in the waiting area
12. Poster instructions
13. Directory map
14. Waiting chairs
15. Divider/ curtains for privacy
16. Drinking water
17. Canteen
18. Guides/ Usher
Important
Not Important
APPENDIX B: Informed Consent and Questionnaire (Tagalog Version)
KAALAMANG PAHINTULOT
Kami, 3rd year Medical Students ng School of Medicine-Saint Luis University, ay
nagsasagawangpag-aaralna may titulong“Level of Satisfaction with Health Service Utilization at the
SLU-Hospital of the Sacred Heart- Out Patient Department.”
Nais naming hinginanginyongpartisipasyonsanasabingpag-aaral. Angresultangpag-aaralnaito ay
maaaringmgamitngospitalsapagpapagandangserbiyo.
Lahatngnakalapnaimpormasyon
ay
pananatilihinglihim at hindikailangangilagayangpangalansa questionnaire naipamamahaginangsagayon
ay hindimaapektuhanangpagtratong hospital personnel at gamutanngpasyente.
Salamatpo.
The Researchers:
Banawol, Ji-ilhan L.
Capuyan, Jamie Joy L.
De la Cruz, Ma. Sophia Catrina B.
Govindaraju, Chetana
Hernal, Criselita S.
Jonatas, Rose Ann S.
Mil, Ma. Selene B.
Taccayan, Joyanne Mae G.
Tomboc, Jessa Maine T.
May pahintulotni:
Dr. John Anthony Domantay, MD, FPSP
Research Adviser
PangkalahatangImpormasyon
Pangalan (opsyonal): ______________________________________
Panuto: Paki-lagyanng(X)angkahonnainyongsagot.
⎕ 18-20 ⎕21-30 ⎕31-40 ⎕41-50
⎕51-60 ⎕61-65
Kasarian:
⎕Lalake ⎕Babae
Civil status:
⎕Walangasawa
⎕Kasal ⎕Balo
Department Consulting: ⎕Internal Medicine
⎕Ob-Gyne ⎕Surgery
Ocupation:
⎕Empleyadonggobyerno
⎕PribadongEmpleyado
⎕Sarilinghanapbuhay
⎕Walangtrabaho
Edad:
Educational Attainment:
⎕Nakataposngkolehiyo
⎕Nakataposngsekondarya
⎕Nakataposngelementarya ⎕Iba pa:_______________________
Lagda:_________________________________
Questionnaire
A. Panuto: Basahin at
sagutinangmgasumusunodnapahayagnakaugnaysainyongpananawukolsaserbisyongospital.
Lagyanngcheck(√) anginyongnapilingsagot.
Anglarawang
ay nagpapahiwatigna kayo ay satisfied.
Anglarawang
ay nagpapahiwatigna kayo ay hindi satisfied.
Health care service Quality Dimensions
Level of
Satisfaction
Satisfie
d
1. Angpisiskalnaitsura at ayosng Out Patient Department
a. Kalinisan
b. Maliwanag
c. Maginhawa
d. Serbisyongseguridad
e. Mgaupuangnagagamit
f.
Pasilidadnakubeta
g. Basurahangnagagamit
h. Sistemangbentilasyon
i.
Espasyonglugarantayan
2. Angprosesongpagkuhang record saospital
a. Panahon/orasnaginugugolsapag-antayng record nakukunin.
b. Panahon/orasnaginugugolsapag-antaysa doctor.
3. Mgatauhan
A. Relasyonng doctor sakanyanpasyente
a. Pagkamagiliwngdoktor
b. Pagkamagalangngdoktor
c. Pagkamahinahonngdoktor
d. Pagka-pasensyosongdoktor
e. Pagkasensitibongdoktor
f.
Handangtumulongsapasyente
g. Malinawnapagbibigaynginstruksyonngmgadoktor
Not
Satisfie
d
h. Malinawnapagpapayongdoktor
i.
Maayosnapagpapaliwanagngmgatanongsapasyente
B. Nars
a. Pagkamagiliwngnars
b. Madalinglapitanangnars
c. Handangtumulongsapasyente
d. Pagkamagalangngnars
e. Pagkamahinahonngnars
f.
Pagka-pasensyosongmganars
g. Pagkasensitibongmganars
h. Maayosnapagpapaliwanagngmganarssamgatanongngpasyente
4. Mgagamot
a. Angmga gamut ay nabibilisaloobngospital
b. Abot-kayanghalagangmgagamotsaloobngospital
5. Laboratoryo
a. Distansyanglaboratoryo
b. Mgapagsusurinapwedengipagawasalaboratoryo
c. Angprosesongpagpapagawangpagsusuri
d. Angpresyongmgapagsusuri
6. Ibang diagnostic work-up saloobngospital
a. Mayroong X-ray, Ultrasound, at CT-scan saloobngospital
b. Lokasyonng CT-Scan, X-ray at Ultrasound Rooms
c. Pagtatakdasapaggamitng Ct-scan at Ultrasound
d. Maayosnapagganangmga X-ray machines
e. Maginhawa at matiwasayanglugarhintayansa X-ray
f.
Presyongmga radiologic procedures
B. Aspetongkahalagahan: Bigyanghalagaangmgaserbisyo at
amenidadnanakalistaayonsainyongpalagaynakahalagahan. Lagyanngcheck(√)
anginyongnapilingsagot.
Anglarawang
ay importante.
Anglarawang
ay hindiimportante.
Mgaserbisyo o amenidad
Importante
1. Silidgamutan
2. Lugar antayan
3. Bentilasyon
4. Kaliwanagan
5. Kubeta
6. Guwardya
7. Basurahan
8. Kalinisannglugar
9. Information center
10. Airconditioning /Electric fans
11. Tekebisyonsalugarantayan
12. Mgainstruksyongnaka-paskil
13. Mapa
14. Mgaupuan
15. Dividers/ kurtinaparasa
privacy
16. Malinisnatubignamaiinom
17. Kantina
18. Giya/Tagahatid/Tagaakay
Hindi importante
APPENDIX C: Level of Satisfaction with association with Age and Gender
Age
Health Care
18-20
21-330
Service Quality
Dimension (n=125)
Physical Appearance and Layout of OPD
Gender
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-65
p value
Male
Female
p value
Cleanliness
Lighting
94.44%
100%
92.68%
87.80%
95.00%
100%
95.24%
90.48%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0.8691
0.1722
96.67%
96.67%
94.74%
93.68%
0.0035
0.0269
Comfortable
83.33%
78.05%
85.00%
90.48%
90.91%
100%
0.4172
73.33%
89.47
3.5982
Security Services
88.89%
75.61%
90.00%
95.24%
100.00%
100%
0.0622
83.33%
89.47%
0.3364
Availability of
waiting chair
66.67%
63.41%
85.00%
76.19%
81.82%
100.00%
0.0851
73.33%
75.79%
0.0008
Toilet facility
83.33%
70.73%
90.00%
90.48%
90.91%
100.00%
0.0866
86.67%
83.16%
0.0294
Available trashcans
83.33%
82.93%
100%
90.48%
90.91%
100.00%
0.2438
90.00%
89.47%
0.068
Ventilation system
72.22%
78.05%
95.00%
85.71%
72.73%
100.00%
0.1504
83.33%
83.16%
0.0664
Space of waiting
61.11% 53.66% 70.00%
area
Process of getting/securing Hospital record
76.19%
72.73%
92.86%
0.1136
63.33%
68.42%
0.0867
Waiting time to get
record
77.78%
65.85%
90.00%
66.67%
72.73%
92.86%
0.1841
80.00%
73.68%
0.2078
Waiting time to
see the doctor
77.78%
41.46%
60.00%
66.67%
63.64%
78.57%
0.0576
63.33%
58.95
0.0457
Personnel
Doctor-Patient relationship
Cordiality of
94.44%
doctors
Politeness of
100%
doctor
Temperament of
94.44%
doctor
Patience of doctor
100%
90.24%
100%
95.24%
100%
100%
0.4805
96.67%
94.74%
0.0035
85.37%
100%
95.24%
100%
100%
0.0726
96.67%
93.68%
0.0269
82.93%
100%
95.24%
90.91%
100%
0.1559
93.33%
91.58%
0.006
85.37%
100%
100%
100%
92.86%
0.0612
96.67%
93.68%
0.0269
Sensitivity of
doctor
Willingness to help
patient
94.44%
80.49%
100%
85.71%
100%
100%
0.0674
90.00%
90.53%
0.073
94.44%
87.80%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0.1426
96.67%
94.74%
0.0035
Clarity of
instructions given
by the doctor
Clarity of advice
given
Doctor's
explanation to
queries of patient
94.44%
75.61%
100%
100%
100%
92.86%
0.0061
93.33
89.47%
0.073
94.44%
80.49%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
0.0128
93.33%
92.63%
0.0759
88.89%
80.49%
100.00%
85.71%
100.00%
100.00%
0.1004
90.00%
89.47%
0.068
Nurses
Cordiality of nurses
94.44%
85.37%
90.00%
95.24%
90.91%
92.86%
0.8198
96.67%
88.42%
0.9625
Approachability o
nurses
94.44%
73.17%
85.00%
95.24%
100.00%
92.86%
0.0564
93.33%
84.21%
0.9318
Nurse willingness
to help
94.44%
73.17%
95.00%
95.24%
100.00%
100.00%
0.0086
86.67%
89.47%
0.0086
Politeness of
nurses
Temperament of
nurses
Patienceof nurses
94.44%
80.49%
95.00%
100.00%
100.00%
92.86%
0.0876
93.33%
90.53%
0.0107
94.44%
82.93%
90.00%
95.24%
100.00%
92.86%
0.4391
93.33%
89.47%
0.073
94.44%
82.93%
90.00%
95.24%
100.00%
100.00%
0.2515
96.67%
89.47%
0.7102
Sensibility of
nurses
Nurses explanation
to queries of
patient
88.89%
63.41%
85.00%
90.48%
100.00%
92.86%
0.0123
90.00%
78.95%
1.192
94.44%
73.17%
95.00%
90.48%
100.00%
100.00%
0.0176
93.33%
86.32%
0.5026
Medicines
Availability of
medicine
Affordability of
medicines
72.22%
75.61%
95.00%
66.67%
54.55%
71.43%
0.1839
66.67%
76.84%
0.7628
77.78%
46.34%
75.00%
38.10%
63.64%
57.14%
0.0522
50.00%
58.95%
0.4239
Laboratory Work-ups and Diagnostic Procedures
Accessibility of
laboratory
(distance)
Availability of
laboratory test
83.33%
82.93%
100%
80.95%
100%
100%
0.1115
83.33%
90.53%
0.5731
94.44%
80.49%
100%
90.48%
90.91%
92.86%
0.2501
86.67%
90.53%
0.068
Procedures to
access laboratory
test
Laboratory fee
94.44%
78.05%
100%
95.24%
100%
85.71%
0.0541
86.67%
90.53%
0.068
77.78%
48.78%
75.00%
76.19%
63.64%
71.43%
0.1365
66.67%
65.26%
0.0063
Availability of other Diagnostic test inside the Hospital
Availability of xray, ultrasound,
and CT scans
88.89%
95.12%
100%
90.48%
100%
92.86%
0.6101
96.67%
93.68%
0.0269
Location of CT
scan, x-ray and
ultrasound rooms
83.33%
92.68%
100%
95.24%
100%
92.86%
0.3633
90.00%
94.74%
0.2463
Scheduling of
procedurs for CT
scan and
ultrasound
X-ray machines are
operational
77.78%
90.24%
100%
90.48%
100%
92.86%
0.2104
86.67%
92.63%
0.4042
94.44%
95.12%
100%
95.24%
100%
92.86%
0.8656
93.33%
96.84%
0.1028
Comfortable
waiting area for xray
Fee of radiologic
procedures
94.44%
80.49%
100%
80.95%
100%
85.71%
0.1464
86.67%
88.42%
0.0042
77.78%
58.54%
65.00%
80.95%
72.73%
78.57%
0.4155
76.67%
67.37%
0.544
APPENDIX D: Level of Satisfaction in association with Civil Status and Department
Consulting
Civil Status
Health Care Service Quality
Dimension (n=125)
Single
Department Consulting
Married
Widow
p value
Internal
Medicine
OBGyne
Surgery
Physical Appearance and Layout of OPD
Cleanliness
92.45%
96.97%
100%
0.4426
93.75%
97.44%
100%
0.5388
Lighting
92.45%
95.45%
100%
0.6457
92.50%
97.44%
100%
0.4617
Comfortable
81.13%
87.88%
100%
0.342
81.25%
94.87%
83.33%
0.1964
Security Services
83.02%
90.91%
100%
0.2736
86.25%
94.87%
66.67%
0.1565
Availability of waiting chair
69.81%
78.79%
83.33%
0.4739
77.50%
71.79%
66.67%
0.6066
Toilet facility
75.47%
90.91%
83.33%
0.0737
83.75%
87.18%
66.67%
0.4533
Available trashcans
81.13%
95.45%
100%
0.0273
90.00%
92.31%
66.67%
0.2173
Ventilation system
73.58%
90.91%
83.33%
0.0426
80.00%
89.74%
83.33%
0.4324
Space of waiting area
58.49%
71.21%
100%
0.073
66.25%
69.23%
66.67%
0.7159
77.27%
62.12%
100%
50.00%
0.2281
0.8089
73.75%
58.75%
76.92%
58.97%
83.33%
83.33%
0.6679
0.485
Process of getting/securing Hospital record
Waiting time to get record
Waiting time to see the doctor
Personnel
69.81%
58.49%
Doctor-Patient relationship
Cordiality of doctors
92.45%
96.97%
100%
0.4426
95.00%
97.44%
83.33%
0.3645
Politeness of doctor
90.57%
96.97%
100%
0.2653
93.75%
94.87%
100%
0.6548
Temperament of doctor
88.68%
93.94%
100%
0.4376
91.25%
94.87%
83.33%
0.5366
Patience of doctor
90.57%
96.97%
100%
0.2653
92.50%
97.44%
100%
0.4617
Sensitivity of doctor
86.79%
92.42%
100%
0.4182
92.50%
89.74%
66.67%
0.1719
Willingness to help patient
92.45%
96.97%
100%
0.4426
96.25%
94.87%
83.33%
0.3948
Clarity of instructions given by
the doctor
83.02%
95.45%
100%
0.0521
91.25%
89.74%
83.33%
0.6557
Clarity of advice given
86.79%
96.97%
100.00%
0.0802
93.75%
92.31%
83.33%
0.5676
Doctor's explanation to queries
of patient
83.02%
93.94%
100.00%
0.1057
90.00%
92.31%
66.67%
0.2173
Nurses
Cordiality of nurses
88.68%
92.42%
83.33%
0.6578
93.75%
84.62%
83.33%
0.2946
Approachability o nurses
Nurse willingness to help
79.25%
83.02%
92.42%
92.42%
83.33%
100%
0.1111
0.1818
87.50%
91.25%
84.62%
84.62%
83.33%
83.33%
0.6917
0.4977
Politeness of nurses
86.79%
95.45%
83.33%
0.1985
91.25%
92.31%
83.33%
0.6391
Temperament of nurses
86.79%
93.94%
83.33%
0.3512
88.75%
94.87%
83.33%
0.475
Patienceof nurses
90.57%
90.91%
100%
0.7362
90.00%
94.87%
83.33%
0.5119
Sensibility of nurses
77.36%
84.85%
83.33%
0.5738
83.75%
79.49%
66.67%
0.5131
Nurses explanation to queries
of patient
81.13%
92.42%
100%
0.1103
86.25%
92.31%
83.33%
0.5482
Medicines
Availability of medicine
73.58%
75.76%
66.67%
0.8734
72.50%
79.49%
66.67%
0.5774
Affordability of medicines
56.60%
57.58%
Laboratory Work-ups and Diagnostic Procedures
50.00%
0.937
55.00%
58.97%
66.67%
0.658
Accessibility of laboratory
(distance)
86.79%
89.39%
100%
0.6081
88.75%
92.31%
66.67%
0.2403
Availability of laboratory test
86.79%
92.42%
83.33%
0.531
86.25%
97.44%
83.33%
0.2109
Procedures to access
laboratory test
81.13%
95.45%
100%
0.0273
90.00%
89.74%
83.33%
0.6859
Laboratory fee
58.49%
69.70%
83.33%
0.2845
62.50%
71.79%
66.67%
0.554
100%
0.8258
93.75%
94.87%
100%
0.6548
100%
0.1493
95.00%
92.31%
83.33%
0.4857
100%
0.0961
91.25%
94.87%
66.67%
0.1239
100%
0.673
95.00%
100%
83.33%
0.1706
Availability of other Diagnostic test inside the Hospital
Availability of x-ray,
94.34%
93.94%
ultrasound, and CT scans
Location of CT scan, x-ray and
88.68%
96.97%
ultrasound rooms
Scheduling of procedurs for CT
84.91%
95.45%
scan and ultrasound
X-ray machines are operational
94.34%
96.97%
Comfortable waiting area for xray
84.91%
89.39%
100%
0.4916
87.50%
89.74%
83.33%
0.6882
Fee of radiologic procedures
69.81%
71.21%
50.00%
0.5567
70.00%
69.23%
66.67%
0.7296
APPENDIX E: Level of Satisfaction in association with Occupation and Educational
Attainment
Occupation
Health Care
Gov't Privat
SelfService
e
Employ
Quality
ed
Dimension
(n=125)
Physical Appearance and Layout of OPD
Cleanliness
100%
Lighting
100%
Comfortable
100%
Security
Services
Availability
of waiting
chair
Toilet facility
83.33
%
83.33
%
Available
trashcans
Ventilation
system
Space of
waiting area
100%
100%
100%
83.33
%
Educational Attainment
Unemploy
ed
Other
s
p
value
Elementa
ry Grad
Highscho
ol Grad
Colleg
e
Grad
Other
s
p
value
92.73%
97.30%
100%
90.91%
94.59%
100%
94.74
%
100%
78.18%
91.89%
100%
80.00%
91.89%
100%
65.45%
75.68%
100%
0.613
4
0.357
8
0.110
2
0.086
2
0.041
1
91.30
%
91.30
%
82.61
%
86.96
%
60.87
%
92.86%
96.15%
100%
92.86%
96.15%
85.71%
88.46%
89.29%
90.38%
78.57%
76.92%
93.75
%
75.00
%
81.25
%
81.25
%
0.678
4
0.875
7
0.561
1
0.884
4
0.506
9
73.91
%
82.61
%
78.26
%
52.17
%
89.29%
80.77%
91.89%
100%
88.46%
85.45%
91.89%
100%
85.71%
84.62%
76.36%
86.49%
100%
67.86%
75.00%
0.287
1
0.485
2
0.629
7
0.250
9
74.55%
96.43%
93.75
%
87.50
%
75.00
%
56.25
%
56.36%
72.97%
92.86
%
68.75
%
56.25
%
0.354
4
0.994
3
63.64%
75.68%
100%
41.82%
72.97%
93.75
%
93.75
%
93.75
%
87.50
%
87.50
%
93.75
%
0.855
2
0.966
8
0.936
3
0.422
8
0.861
2
0.616
5
92.73%
84.21
%
94.74
%
84.21
%
84.21
%
89.47
%
84.21
%
68.42
%
0.045
2
0.415
6
0.174
3
0.053
78.57
%
89.47
%
73.68
%
0.013
8
0.003
4
94.59%
100%
100%
87.27%
100%
100%
100%
0.488
2
0.024
85.45%
97.30%
100%
87.27%
100%
100%
94.74
%
100%
0.110
5
0.024
87.27%
94.59%
90.91%
97.3
85.71
%
100%
94.74
%
100%
0.544
7
0.237
1
Process of getting/securing Hospital record
Waiting time
to get record
Waiting time
to see the
doctor
Personnel
100%
66.67
%
69.57
%
60.87
%
67.86%
67.86%
60.71%
59.62%
96.43%
96.15%
92.86%
94.23%
92.86%
90.38%
100%
94.23%
92.86%
90.38%
100%
94.23%
Doctor-Patient relationship
Cordiality of
doctors
Politeness of
doctor
Temperame
nt of doctor
Patience of
doctor
Sensitivity of
doctor
Willingness
to help
patient
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
91.30
%
95.65
%
91.30
%
91.30
%
86.96
%
91.30
%
Clarity of
instructions
given by the
doctor
Clarity of
advice given
Doctor's
explanation
to queries of
patient
Nurses
100%
82.61
%
96.43%
94.23%
75.00
%
0.069
9
80.00%
97.30%
100%
100%
0.006
2
100%
86.96
%
91.30
%
96.43%
96.15%
97.30%
100%
100%
94.23%
0.180
4
0.193
4
85.45%
85.71%
81.25
%
75.00
%
81.82%
91.89%
100%
100%
0.043
6
0.054
7
Cordiality of
nurses
Approachabil
ity o nurses
100%
95.65
%
86.96
%
85.71%
90.38%
91.89%
100%
92.31%
0.693
2
0.220
6
85.45%
78.57%
87.50
%
75.00
%
76.36%
91.89%
100%
94.74
%
94.74
%
0.315
2
0.029
4
Nurse
willingness
to help
Politeness of
nurses
Temperame
nt of nurses
Patienceof
nurses
Sensibility of
nurses
Nurses
explanation
to queries of
patient
Medicines
100%
91.30
%
82.14%
92.31%
81.25
%
0.446
7
80.00%
94.59%
100%
94.74
%
0.046
6
100%
91.30
%
95.65
%
91.30
%
78.26
%
91.30
%
89.29%
94.23%
97.30%
100%
100%
94.23%
81.82%
94.59%
100%
100%
82.14%
94.23%
0.512
7
0.199
8
0.384
81.82%
82.14%
83.64%
97.30%
84.62%
69.09%
91.89%
82.14%
90.38%
0.462
3
0.568
6
78.18%
91.89%
92.86
%
85.71
%
100%
100%
82.14%
81.25
%
81.25
%
93.75
%
68.75
%
81.25
%
94.74
%
100%
0.012
1
0.030
3
0.057
2
0.013
6
0.018
1
Availability
of medicine
Affordability
of medicines
100%
69.57
%
39.13
%
78.57%
69.23%
62.16%
55.77%
0.444
3
0.216
5
81.82%
60.71%
81.25
%
68.75
%
50.91%
56.76%
92.86
%
85.71
%
63.16
%
52.63
%
0.040
9
0.128
1
Accessibility
100% 91.30
82.14%
88.46%
of laboratory
%
Availability
100% 91.30
85.71%
90.38%
of laboratory
%
test
Procedures
100% 86.96
89.29%
90.38%
to access
%
laboratory
test
Laboratory
100% 65.22
64.29%
63.46%
fee
%
Availability of other Diagnostic test inside the Hospital
93.75
%
87.50
%
0.635
8
0.855
9
85.45%
89.19%
81.82%
94.59%
92.86
%
100%
94.74
%
94.74
%
0.675
5
0.081
1
87.50
%
0.912
5
83.64%
89.19%
100%
100%
0.114
8
62.50
%
0.502
2
56.36%
72.97%
92.86
%
57.89
%
0.044
4
Availability
100%
86.96
92.86%
98.08%
89.19%
100%
100%
0.277
100%
86.96
96.43%
94.23%
0.375
1
0.642
94.55%
Location
93.75
%
93.75
92.73%
89.19%
100%
100%
0.317
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
83.33
%
Laboratory Work-ups and Diagnostic Procedures
%
1
Scheduling
of
procedures
X-ray
machines are
operational
Comfortable
waiting area
100%
91.30
%
%
92.86%
88.46%
93.75
%
0.863
89.09%
89.19%
100%
94.74
%
0.544
2
1
100%
95.65
%
96.43%
96.15%
93.75
%
0.975
94.55%
94.59%
100%
100%
0.600
2
100%
78.26
%
85.71%
90.38%
93.75
%
0.433
2
81.82%
86.49%
100%
100%
0.086
9
Fee
100%
73.91
%
71.43%
69.23%
50.00
%
0.216
6
54.55%
78.38%
100%
73.68
%
0.003
7