| Literature DB >> 30893906 |
Abid Hussain1, Muhammad Safdar Sial2, Sardar Muhammad Usman3, Jinsoo Hwang4, Yushi Jiang5, Awaisra Shafiq6.
Abstract
Patient satisfaction can identify specific areas of improvement in public sector hospitals. However, the Pakistani healthcare system, and quality of service delivery is rarely assessed through the perspective of patient satisfaction. Our study demonstrated the performance of public healthcare systems in Pakistan by interacting with physical services (tangible and environmental), doctor⁻patient communication, and pharmacy and laboratory services based on patient satisfaction. Primary data were collected from the patients by using a random sampling method. Patients who participated in the study were visitors of public hospitals' outpatient departments. A total of 554 questionnaires were circulated, and 445 were received. The confirmatory factor and multiple regression analyses were employed to analyze the collected data. The results revealed that laboratory, as well pharmacy services, had positive significant effects (p = 0.000) on patient satisfaction, while doctor⁻patient communication (p = 0.189) and physical facilities (p = 0.85) had an insignificant relationship with patient satisfaction. Therefore, it is suggested that a significant communication gap exists in the doctor⁻patient setting, and that Pakistan's healthcare system is deprived of physical facilities. Consequently, such services need further improvements.Entities:
Keywords: doctor-patient communication; laboratory services; measuring patient satisfaction; pharmacy services; physical facilities
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30893906 PMCID: PMC6466114 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16060994
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The public healthcare delivery system in Pakistan.
The population of Punjab province and the three districts.
| Population | Area km2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Punjab Province | 110,012,442 | 205,344 |
| Bahawalpur District | 3,668,106 | 24,830 |
| Bahawalnagar District | 2,981,919 | 8878 |
| Rahim Yar Khan District | 4,814,006 | 11,880 |
Source: Statistical Bureau of Punjab.
Hospitals in the districts.
| Sr. No. | Teaching Hospital | District Hospital (DHQ) | Tehsil Headquarter (THQs) | Rural Health Center (RHCs) | Basic Health Unit (BHUs) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 4 | 10 | 72 |
| 2 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 10 | 101 |
| 3 | 1 | 0 | 3 | 19 | 104 |
| 2 | 1 | 11 | 29 | 277 |
Source: Statistical Bureau of Punjab.
Demographic characteristics.
| Characteristics | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Male | 199 | 44.7 |
| Female | 246 | 55.3 |
|
| ||
| Less than 20 | 36 | 8.1 |
| 20 to 29 | 53 | 11.9 |
| 30 to 39 | 93 | 20.9 |
| 40 to 49 | 137 | 30.8 |
| 50 and above | 126 | 28.3 |
|
| ||
| Married | 243 | 54.6 |
| Single | 188 | 42.3 |
| Divorced | 12 | 2.7 |
| Widow | 2 | 0.4 |
|
| ||
| Student | 7 | 1.6 |
| Government employee | 45 | 10.2 |
| House wife | 117 | 26.2 |
| Laborer | 108 | 24.2 |
| Agriculture | 43 | 9.7 |
| Un-employed | 71 | 16.0 |
| Retired | 33 | 7.5 |
| Other | 21 | 4.6 |
|
| ||
| No formal education | 135 | 30.3 |
| Primary/elementary school | 145 | 32.6 |
| Secondary/high school | 106 | 23.8 |
| College/university | 24 | 5.3 |
| Postgraduate | 35 | 8.0 |
|
| ||
| Less than PKR 10,000 | 123 | 27.6 |
| PKR 10,000 to 14,999 | 103 | 23.2 |
| PKR 15,000 to 19,999 | 74 | 16.6 |
| PKR 20,000 to 24,999 | 61 | 13.8 |
| PKR 25,000 to 29,999 | 47 | 10.5 |
| PKR 30,000 or more | 37 | 8.3 |
Descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlations, and reliability coefficients among variables.
| Variable | Mean | SD | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient satisfaction | 3.99 | 0.61 |
| ||||
| Laboratory services | 3.52 | 0.77 | 440 ** |
| |||
| Pharmacy services | 4.15 | 0.66 | 0.445 ** | 0.339 ** |
| ||
| Doctor–patient communication | 2.25 | 0.80 | 0.205 ** | 0.189 ** | 0.230 ** |
| |
| Physical services | 3.02 | 0.89 | 0.269 ** | 0.402 ** | 0.192 ** | 0.253 ** |
|
Notes 1: SD = Standard Deviation. Notes 2: Numbers in parenthesis are Cronbach’s Alphas (α). Notes 3: ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed).
Composite reliability, convergent, and discriminant validity.
| CR | AVE | MSV | MAX (H) | PS | PHS | LS | PF | DPC | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.965 | 0.753 | 0.230 | 0.976 |
| ||||
|
| 0.934 | 0.639 | 0.230 | 0.939 | 0.479 *** |
| |||
|
| 0.928 | 0.685 | 0.202 | 0.935 | 0.450 *** | 0.369 *** |
| ||
|
| 0.964 | 0.844 | 0.148 | 0.984 | 0.267 *** | 0.199 *** | 0.385 *** |
| |
|
| 0.942 | 0.804 | 0.063 | 0.974 | 0.220 *** | 0.222 *** | 0.192 *** | 0.251 *** | 0.897 |
Notes 1: PS: Patient Satisfaction, PHS: Pharmacy services, LS: Laboratory services, PF: Physical Facilities, DPC: Doctor–patient communication. Notes 2: CR = Composite Reliabilities, AVE = Average Variance Extracted, MSV = Maximum Shared Variance, MAX (H) = Maximal Reliability. Notes 3: Significance level: *** p < 0.001.
Model fit statistics.
| Absolute Model Fit Indices | |
|---|---|
| Chi Square | 780.547 |
| DF | 415 |
| Chi Square/DF | 1.881 |
| Standardized Root Mean Residual (SRMR) | 0.042 |
| Comparative Fit Index (CFI) | 0.980 |
| Normed Fit Index (NFI) | 0.959 |
| Tucker Lewis Index (TLI) | 0.976 |
| Relative Fit Index (RFI) | 0.951 |
| Incremental Fit Index (IFI) | 0.980 |
| Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) | 0.045 |
Results of the confirmatory factor analysis.
| Construct/Factors | Items | Factor Loadings | Cronbach Alpha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patient satisfaction | 0.966 | ||
| Ps1 | 0.798 | ||
| Ps2 | 0.817 | ||
| Ps3 | 0.877 | ||
| Ps4 | 0.893 | ||
| Ps5 | 0.863 | ||
| Ps6 | 0.723 | ||
| Ps7 | 0.879 | ||
| Ps8 | 0.876 | ||
| Ps9 | 0.859 | ||
| Pharmacy services | 0.931 | ||
| Ph1 | 0.780 | ||
| Ph2 | 0.826 | ||
| Ph3 | 0.796 | ||
| Ph4 | 0.764 | ||
| Ph5 | 0.797 | ||
| Ph6 | 0.827 | ||
| Ph7 | 0.795 | ||
| Ph8 | 0.752 | ||
| Doctor–patient communication | 0.942 | ||
| Dpc1 | 0.937 | ||
| Dpc2 | 0.877 | ||
| Dpc3 | 0.883 | ||
| Dpc4 | 0.926 | ||
| Laboratory services | 0.927 | ||
| Ls1 | 0.748 | ||
| Ls2 | 0.851 | ||
| Ls3 | 0.827 | ||
| Ls4 | 0.845 | ||
| Ls5 | 0.800 | ||
| Ls6 | 0.770 | ||
| Physical services | 0.968 | ||
| PF1 | 0.930 | ||
| PF2 | 0.933 | ||
| PF3 | 0.883 | ||
| PF4 | 0.875 | ||
| PF5 | 0.923 |
Multiple regression models (dependent variable: Patient satisfaction).
| β Coefficients | 95.0% Confidence Interval for β | Collinearity Statistics | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Β | T | Sig. | Lower Bound | Upper Bound | Tolerance | VIF | |
| Constant | 9.591 | 0.000 | 1.316 | 1.994 | |||
| 1. Pharmacy services | 0.287 | 6.328 | 0.000 | 0.158 | 0.300 | 0.766 | 1.306 |
| 2. Laboratory services | 0.331 | 7.713 | 0.000 | 0.230 | 0.387 | 0.855 | 1.169 |
| 3. Doctor–patient communication | 0.055 | 1.316 | 0.189 | −0.021 | 0.105 | 0.900 | 1.111 |
| 4. Physical services | 0.076 | 1.727 | 0.085 | 0-.007 | 0.113 | 0.806 | 1.241 |
| Model summary | |||||||