| Literature DB >> 20979599 |
Muhammad A Zahid1, Jude U Ohaeri, Adel A Al-Zayed.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Assessment of patients' satisfaction with health care services could help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the system and provide guidance for further development. The study's objectives were to: (i) assess the pattern of satisfaction with hospital care for a sample of people with schizophrenia in Kuwait, using the Verona Service Satisfaction Scale (VSSS-EU); ii) compare the pattern of satisfaction with those of similar studies; and iii) assess the association of VSSS seven domains with a number of variables representing met and unmet needs for care, family caregiver burden, severity of psychopathology, level of psychosocial functioning, socio-demographic characteristics, psychological well-being and objective quality of life.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20979599 PMCID: PMC2984495 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-294
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
VSSS domain scores, internal consistency, and proportion of subjects satisfied with domains: compared with other studies
| VSSS domain/subscale | No. of items | Reliability: Cronbach's Alpha (N = 130) | Unadjusted mean score (SD): N = 130 | Adjusted mean score* (SE) N = 111 | (%) dissatisfied with domain i.e. unadjusted score < 3.5 ** | (%) satisfied with domain i.e. unadjusted score >/= 3.5 | Unadjusted mean (SD) scores EPSILON: Pooled data N = 399*** | Danish study of subjects with mood disorders: Aged < 40 yrs/Aged ≥40 yrs Mean (SD)**** |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall satisfaction | 3 | 0.81 | 4.04(0.71) | 4.07(0.06) | 28(21.5) | 102(69.4) | 3.83(0.79) | 3.63(1.06)/ |
| Professional skills | 16 | 0.94 | 3.85(0.66) | 3.89(0.06) | 35(26.9) | 95(73.1) | 3.88(0.57) | 3.60(0.98)/ |
| Information | 3 | 0.66 | 3.26(0.81) | 3.26(0.08) | 89(68.5) | 41(31.5) | 3.39(0.93) | 3.44(1.10)/ |
| Access | 2 | - | 3.59(0.87) | 3.58(0.08) | 44(33.8) | 86(66.2) | 3.83(0.73) | 3.41(1.46)/ |
| Efficacy | 8 | 0.91 | 3.83(0.68) | 3.87(0.06) | 31(23.8) | 99(76.2) | 3.56(0.74) | 3.38(1.08)/ |
| Types of | 11***** | 0.75 | 3.39(0.45) | 3.42(0.04) | 87(66.9) | 43(33.1) | 3.64(0.42) | 3.54(0.61)/ |
| Relatives' involvement | 5 | 0.88 | 3.79(0.68) | 3.82(0.06) | 36(27.7) | 94(72.3) | 3.39(0.96) | 2.92(1.26)/ |
| Total VSSS score | 48 | 0.97 | 3.68(0.54) | 3.71(0.05) | 42(32.3) | 88(67.7) | 3.70(0.50) | 3.40(0.98)/ |
*Adjusted for sex, age, education, marital status, family income, duration of illness, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale score, and Global Assessment of Functioning score. N is < 130 because of missing values.
** Using the recommended cut-off score (< 3.5) for dissatisfaction/satisfaction (Ruggeri et al., 2003) [12].
*** Ruggeri M et al 2000 [27]; **** Kessing LV et al 2006 [19]; ***** Six items of the service provision section were not included (see text for details)
Association of VSSS subscales with socio-demographic, clinical variables, needs for care, caregiver burden, affect and self-esteem
| Dependent variables: VSSS Subscales | Independent variables* | Variance (%) | Standard beta | T value | P value | Tolerance ** | VIF ** |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total VSSS score | Self-esteem | 15.5 | 0.31 | 3.1 | 0.003 | 0.88 | 1.14 |
| Overall SS | Positive self-esteem | 11.1 | 0.36 | 3.8 | 0.0001 | 0.99 | 1.01 |
| Professionals' skills | Self-esteem | 15.6 | 0.39 | 4.1 | 0.0001 | 1.0 | 1.00 |
| Information | Negative self-esteem | 7.1 | -0.26 | 2.7 | 0.01 | 0.99 | 1.00 |
| Access | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Efficacy | Positive self-esteem | 18.9 | 0.42 | 4.6 | 0.0001 | 0.99 | 1.00 |
| Types of interventions | Positive symptoms: ICD 10 | 5.5 | 0.21 | 2.1 | 0.04 | 0.98 | 1.00 |
| Relatives'involvement | BPRS score | 4.3 | 0.18 | 1.8 | 0.08 | 0.99 | 1.02 |
*Independent variables entered: Block 1: socio-demographics; block 2: clinical variables: duration illness, BPRS, GAF, number of ICD-10 checklist positive and negative symptoms; block 3: positive affect, negative affect, positive self-esteem, negative self-esteem, total self-esteem; block 4: met needs subscales and total for user; block 5: unmet needs and total for user; block 6: IEQ subscale scores.
** Multicollinearity values showed no significant multicollinearity: cut-off values are: Tolerance: ≤ 0.2; VIF: > 4