| Literature DB >> 21499456 |
Ct Bamise1, Ta Bada, Fo Bamise, Eo Ogunbodede.
Abstract
AIM: The objective of this study was to provide information on the level of utilization and satisfaction of residential university students with the dental services provided by the dental clinic of a teaching hospital. VOLUNTEERS AND MATERIAL: A stratified sampling technique was used to recruit volunteers from the outpatient clinic of the Obafemi Awolowo University Teaching Hospital Complex, Ile-Ife, Nigeria. Information was collected by a self-administered questionnaire composed of questions that measure the level of utilization and satisfaction with the dental services provided. Questionnaires were provided to 650 randomly chosen students residing in the University hostels. There were 39 refusals, and 6 incomplete questionnaires were discarded. This left a sample size of 605 volunteers.Entities:
Keywords: Nigeria; dental care; satisfaction; utilization; young adults
Year: 2008 PMID: 21499456 PMCID: PMC3074269 DOI: 10.4176/080601
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Libyan J Med ISSN: 1819-6357 Impact factor: 1.657
Frequency distribution of gender and number of years on campus of the respondents
| Gender | Total respondents | Those who visited the hospital within 12 months | Those who did not visit | Significance of difference between genders |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 307 | 24 (7.8%) | 283 | X2= 0.00, df=1, p=0.96 |
| Female | 298 | 23 (7.7%) | 275 | |
| Total | 605 | 47 (7.8%) | 558 | |
| Two | 311 | 17 (5.5%) | 294 | X2=5.91, df=2, p=0.05 |
| Three | 215 | 19 (8.8%) | 196 | |
| Four years or more | 66 | 9 (13.6%) | 57 | |
| Total | 592 | 45 (7.6%) | 547 |
13 volunteers did not give their number of years on campus.
Reasons for unwillingness of respondents who had dental problems to seek treatment
| Reasons not to seek treatment | Responses | Significance of difference between genders | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes | No | Total | |||
| Anticipation of painful experience | Male | 24 | 13 | 37 | X2=0.46, df=1, p=0.50 |
| Female | 33 | 24 | 57 | ||
| Total | 57 (60.6%) | 37 | 94 | ||
| Anticipation of worsened esthetics | Male | 13 | 22 | 35 | X2=2.50, df=1, p=0.11 |
| Female | 10 | 37 | 47 | ||
| Total | 23 (28.0%) | 59 | 82 | ||
| Distance to the hospital | Male | 9 | 22 | 31 | X2=0.08, df=1, p=0.78 |
| Female | 16 | 34 | 50 | ||
| Total | 25 (30.9%) | 56 | 81 | ||
| Anticipation of expensive dental charges | Male | 24 | 15 | 39 | X2=0.01, df=1, p=0.94 |
| Female | 34 | 22 | 56 | ||
| Total | 58 (61.1%) | 37 | 95 | ||
| Attitude of staff in previous visit | Male | 3 | 26 | 29 | X2=0.21, df=1, p=0.65 |
| Female | 6 | 37 | 43 | ||
| Total | 9 (12.5%) | 63 | 72 | ||
| Anticipation of long waiting time | Male | 24 | 17 | 42 | X2=1.63, df=1, p=0.20 |
| Female | 24 | 29 | 53 | ||
| Total | 48 (51.1%) | 46 | 94 | ||
| Just too busy | Male | 28 | 18 | 46 | X2=0.85, df=1, p=0.36 |
| Female | 29 | 27 | 56 | ||
| Total | 57 (55.9%) | 45 | 102 | ||
| Failure of previous treatment | Male | 4 | 27 | 31 | X2=0.03, df=1, p=0.87 |
| Female | 5 | 38 | 43 | ||
| Total | 9 (12.2%) | 65 | 74 | ||
Satisfaction rate of respondents with each aspect of the quality of service. In the table “satisfied” refers to those who responded either “satisfied” or “very satisfied.”
| Component | Gender | Satisfied | Not Satisfied | Uncertain | Satisfaction Rate (%) | Significance of difference between genders |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Distance to the hospital | Male (n=52) | 31 | 7 | 14 | 59.6% | X2=0.01, df=1, p=0.93 |
| Female (n=43) | 28 | 6 | 9 | 65.1% | ||
| Attitude of staff | Male (n=52) | 32 | 11 | 9 | 61.5% | X2=0.70, df=1, p=0.40 |
| Female (n=43) | 32 | 7 | 4 | 74.4% | ||
| Cost of treatment | Male (n=52) | 30 | 14 | 8 | 57.7% | X2=0.30, df=1, p=0.59 |
| Female (n=43) | 28 | 10 | 5 | 65.1% | ||
| Time spent | Male (n=52) | 14 | 31 | 7 | 26.9% | X2=2.4, df=1, p=0.12 |
| Female (n=43) | 19 | 31 | 3 | 44.2% | ||
| Clinic environment | Male (n=52) | 35 | 6 | 11 | 67.3% | X2=0.97, df=1, p=0.33 |
| Female (n=43) | 36 | 3 | 4 | 83.7% |