| Literature DB >> 32992600 |
Yuping Li1, Weijuan Gong2, Xiang Kong3, Olaf Mueller4, Guangyu Lu5,6,7.
Abstract
Outpatient care is made up of medical procedures, tests, and services that can be provided to the patient in a setting that doesn't involve an overnight hospital stay. In China, tertiary hospitals are medical services centers of health care systems, and some tertiary hospitals had more than 20,000 outpatient visits per day. However, a systematic review of existed evidence on factors influencing the outpatient satisfaction in tertiary hospitals in China could inform the efforts and does not yet exist. Therefore, in order to better understand the outpatient satisfaction provided by tertiary hospitals in China, we carried out a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting on the level of and factors associated with outpatient satisfaction in Chinese tertiary hospitals were systematically searched in both Chinese and English electronic databases. A total of 36 articles reported 35 studies that met the inclusion criteria. Out of these eight were household surveys covering 12,119 residents, and another 27 directly interviewed 45,930 outpatients during their hospital visits from 185 hospitals. The included studies generally used self-designed questionnaire and indicated there is a lack of standardized questionnaire for investigating outpatient satisfaction in China. The outpatients showed the highest satisfaction with the doctors and nurses and the lowest satisfaction with the hospital hygiene and outpatient procedures, especially with the long waiting time. The socio-demographic characteristics (e.g., age, marital status, income and education levels), professional skills and service attitudes of medical staff were reported to be associated with outpatient satisfaction. The results indicated that in China, the outpatient satisfaction can be largely improved. Firstly, the attitude of medical service providers, especially the pre-diagnosis nurses, registration officers, and pharmaceutical counters should be improved. Furthermore, to shorten the waiting time, policies should be developed to guide patients with common diseases and slight discomforts to community health systems to alleviate the overload in tertiary hospitals. Considering the strained relations between the doctors and patients in the clinical practice, improving patient satisfaction in China deserves more attention and research.Entities:
Keywords: doctor-patient communication/interaction; evidence-based medicine; health services research; patient satisfaction; quality of care
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32992600 PMCID: PMC7579147 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17197070
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Classification of Chinese hospitals (Hospitals in China are organized according to a three-tier system including primary, secondary, or tertiary levels.).
Figure 2Selection Process Flow Diagram [52,53].
Characteristics of included studies (n = 35).
| Author and Year | Study Context | Number of Participants | Participant Information | Sampling Methods | Study Design |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wenya, Yu et al., 2016 | 11 tertiary hospitals in Shanghai | 1050 outpatients from different clinical departments with varying diseases | Male: 439 | Random selection | cross-sectional survey |
| Liyang, Tang. 2011 | A household survey in 17 provinces | 3424 residents | Urban residents: 3209 (93.76%) | NR * | cross-sectional survey |
| Jing Sun et al., 2017 | 136 tertiary hospitals from 31 provinces | 27,475 outpatients, of which 3923 are senior outpatients older than 60 | Male: 8792 Female: 18,683 | Random selection and convenient sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jay Pan et al., 2015 | Survey with residents who had visited hospitals in the past 2 weeks | 6393 residents | 2621 male, | A multistage cluster sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jinghua, Li et al., 2016 | Household survey in health care facilities in Jiling Province | 68 residents had at least one outpatient visit in the past 2 weeks in tertiary hospitals. | 29 male | A multi-stage stratified sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jinzhu, Xie et al., 2017 | Three tertiary hospitals in Hubei Province | 300 outpatients | NR | NR | cross-sectional survey |
| Chunlei, Han et al., 2012 | One Tertiary hospital in Shandong Province | 338 outpatients | Male 148 | A stratified random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Qing Lu et al., 2016 | 3 public hospitals in Beijing | 318 outpatients | Male: 137 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jing Zhao et al., 2016 | A tertiary hospital | 197 outpatients | Male: 108 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Wenlong, Hu et al., 2007 | 2 tertiary hospital in Xuzhou | 386 outpatients | Male: 253 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Yanxia, Yang et al., 2015 | A tertiary hospital | 1998 outpatients | 1998 outpatients | NR | cross-sectional survey |
| Rong Xu and Xinzhen, Jing. 2004 | A tertiary hospital in Guangdong Province | 304 outpatients | 304 outpatients | NR | cross-sectional survey |
| Junjie, Sun and Shuangqing, Li. 2018 | A tertiary hospital in Sichuan Province | 185 outpatients | Male: 68 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Zhanwei, Zhou et al., 2011 | A tertiary hospital | 363 outpatients | Male: 211 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Caoxin, Bao et al., 2015 | 5 tertiary hospitals | 2170 outpatient | 2170 outpatients | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Zhixiang, Teng et al., 2009 | Residents survey | 134 residents who visited the hospitals in the last year, of whom, 40 visited the tertiary hospital | NR | Convenient sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jing Luan et al., 2013 | Residents survey | 510 residents | Male: 178 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jianjie, Zhang. | Residents survey | 484 residents | NR | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Chunhui, Ren. 2014 | Residents | 329 participants | NR | NR | cross-sectional survey |
| Weiming, Shao et al., 2017 | A tertiary hospital | 600 outpatients | NR | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Ying Zou et al., 2014 | A Tertiary hospital in Xiniiang Province | 1300 outpatients | NR | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Mengzhu, Deng et al., 2013 | A Tertiary hospital in Guangdong Province | 200 outpatients | Male: 110 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Huilan, Luo et al., 2010 | A tertiary hospital in Guangdong Province | 1591 outpatients | NR | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Zulipiye.et al., 2016 | A tertiary hospital in Xinjiang Province | 1300 outpatients | Female: 736 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jinping, Shu and Dian Zhou. 2016 | A tertiary hospital in Anhui Province | 396 outpatients | Male: 171 | Stratified cluster sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Kai ling et al., 2009 | A tertiary hospital | 500 outpatients | Male: 307 | NR | cross-sectional survey |
| Yu Li et al., 2011 | Five tertiary Hospitals in Tianjian City | 995 outpatients | Male: 438 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Qinghua, Zhang and Zhanhe, Liu. 2011 | A tertiary hospital in Hebei Province | 817 outpatients | NR | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Fanzhi, Meng et al., 2016 | Residents survey covering 2 cities, 3 counties and 5 villages in Tibet province | 777 residents | Male: 369 | Stratified clustered random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Jun Song et al., 2007 | A tertiary hospital in Jiangsu Province | 93 outpatients | Male: 49 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Shi Guo et al., 2014 | A tertiary hospital in Anhui Province | 239 outpatients | Male: 118 | Stratified random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Xunming, Ji et al., 2010 | A tertiary hospital in Beijing | 504 outpatients | Media age: 47 | Convenient sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Li Ren and Haixuan, Xu. | A tertiary hospital in Shandong Province | 488 outpatients | Male: 216 | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
| Guanghao, Jing and Shunfu, Piao. 2011 | A tertiary hospital | 597 outpatients | NR | NR | cross-sectional survey |
| Lizhen, Deng and Suili, Rao. 2006 | A tertiary hospital | 1226 outpatients | NR | Random sampling | cross-sectional survey |
* NR means not reported. † This study was reported by two papers. Titles of each paper were listed in Supplementary Material 4.
Quality of included studies (n = 35).
| Author and Year | Sample Selection Criteria (Maximum of 4 Stars) | Comparability (Maximum 2 Stars) | Outcome (Maximum 1 Star) | Summary Score (Maximum of 7 Stars) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Representativeness of the Sample | Sample Size | Non-Respondents | Ascertainment of the Satisfaction Level | Comparability of Subjects in Different Outcome Groups; Control of Confounding Factors. | Assessment | ||
| Wenya, Yu et al., 2016. Shanghai | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 7 |
| Liyang Tang, 2011 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 7 |
| Jing Sun, et al., 2017 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | No description | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 6 |
| Jay Pan, et al., 2015 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 7 |
| Jinghua Li et al., 2016 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 7 |
| Jinzhu Xie, et al., 2017 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 6 |
| Chunlei Han et al., 2000 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | data not adjusted for all relevant confounders | Self-report * | 4 |
| Qing Lu et al., 2016 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Jing Zhao et al., 2015 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Wenlong Hu et al., 2007 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Yanxia Yang et al., 2015 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | data not adjusted for all relevant confounders | Self-report * | 4 |
| Rong Xu and Xinzhen Jing. 2004 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | No description | Validated measurement tool * | NA | Self-report * | 3 |
| Junjie Sun and Shuangqing Li, 2018 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | data not adjusted for all relevant confounders | Self-report * | 4 |
| Zhanwei Zhou, et al., 2011 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | No description | data not adjusted for all relevant confounders | Self-report * | 3 |
| Caoxin, Bao, et al., 2015 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | No description | Validated measurement tool * | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Zhixiang, Teng, et al., 2009 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Response rate is unsatisfactory, or the comparability between respondents and nonrespondens is unsatisfactory; | Validated measurement tool * | NA | Self-report * | 3 |
| Jing Luan, et al., 2013 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Justified and satisfactory * | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | NA | Self-report * | 5 |
| Jianjie Zhang. | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 6 |
| Chunhui, Ren. 2014 | Selected group of patients | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | NA | Self-report * | 3 |
| Weiming Shao et al., 2017 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Ying Zou et al., 2014 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | NA | Independent blind assessment * | 4 |
| Mengzhu Deng et al., 2013 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | data not adjusted for all relevant confounders | Self-report * | 4 |
| Huilan Luo et al., 2010 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Zulipiye Tuerxun et al., 2016 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Jinping Shu and Dian Zhou, 2016 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Validated measurement tool * | The study controls for the most important factor **; | Self-report * | 6 |
| Kai Ling et al., 2009 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | No description. | 3 |
| Yu Li, et al., 2011 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Qinghua Zhang and Zhanhe Liu. | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Zhifan Meng, et al., 2016 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Jun Song, et al., 2007 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Shi Guo, et al., 2014 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Xunming Ji, et al., 2010 | Somewhat representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | No description | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 3 |
| Li Ren and Haixuan Xu.2016 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | No description | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 3 |
| Guanghao Jing and Shunfu Piao. 2011 | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
| Lizhen, Deng and Suili, Rao | Truly representative of the average in the target population * | Not justified | Comparability between respondents’ and nonrespondents’ characteristics is established, and the response rate is satisfactory * | Non validated measurement tool, but the tool is available or described *; | NA | Self-report * | 4 |
* the detailed explanation of the number of the stars were in Supplementary Material 2. NA means not applicable and represented that the study did not investigated the factors influencing the outpatient satisfaction.
Findings on levels of outpatient satisfaction of included studies (n = 35).
| Author and Year | Assessment Instrument | Response Rate (%) | Findings on Levels of Outpatient Satisfaction |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wenya, Yu et al., 2016 | Adapted questionnaire from the IPSQ ‡ | 92.48 | The mean overall outpatient satisfaction was 4.0 ± 0.7. Satisfaction with service attitude was the highest, while satisfaction with medical needs being met by doctors was the lowest. |
| Liyang, Tang. 2011 | A self-designed 5-point Likert scale questionnaire | 100 | The mean overall outpatient satisfaction was 3.7 ± 0.76 |
| Jing Sun et al., Laiyang, Wu et al., 2016 | A self-designed 5-point Likert scale questionnaire. | NR | The overall satisfaction score is 4.42 ± 0.68 |
| Jay Pan et al., 2015 | A self-designed 5-point Likert scale questionnaire | 100% | Satisfaction with medical charges was the lowest. |
| Jinghua, Li et al., 2016 | A self-designed questionnaire | NR | The satisfaction of outpatients from county and tertiary hospitals were significantly lower than those visited village/township clinics. |
| Jinzhu, Xie et al., 2017 | A self-designed 5-point Likert scale questionnaire. | 97.2 | Satisfaction with information got was the highest, while satisfaction with medical cost was the lowest |
| Chunlei, Han et al., 2012 | A self-designed questionnaire based on IPSQ | 99.4 | Satisfaction with hospital management is high, while satisfaction with waiting time is low. |
| Qing Lu et al., 2016 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 90.9 | 82. 70% (263 /318) of the study participants stated general satisfaction with the outpatient. |
| Jing Zhao et al., 2016 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 98.5 | Satisfaction with professional skills of doctors was highest, with outpatient management is lowest. |
| Wenlong, Hu et al., 2007 | NR | 96 | The overall satisfaction to the outpatient medical service is 76.9%. |
| Yanxia, Yang et al., 2015 | A self-designed questionnaire | 99.42 | Waiting time, personal health conditions, and knowledge about the diseases are important factors related to outpatient satisfaction. |
| Rong Xu and Xinzhen, Jing. 2004 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 98.7 | Satisfaction with hospital hygiene was highest, and satisfaction with waiting time of medical examinations was lowest. |
| Junjie, Sun and Shuangqing, Li. 2018 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 92.5 | The satisfaction of the outpatients is 87.6% (162/185) |
| Zhanwei, Zhou et al., 2011 | A self-designed questionnaire | 97.4 | The outpatients generally showed a high degree of satisfaction with doctors and a low satisfaction with the service staff (Hospital billing collector) |
| Caoxin, Bao et al., 2015 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | NR | The outpatients’ satisfaction score is 82.48. Satisfaction with the overall evaluation of the work and the medical staff was highest; atisfaction with the treatment effect, cost, and the administrative staff was lowest |
| Zhixiang, Teng et al., 2009 | A self-designed seven-point Likert scale questionnaire | 68.7 | The outpatient satisfaction score is 4.23 ± 1.14. |
| Jing Luan et al., 2013 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 92.8 | NR * |
| Jianjie Zhang. | A self-designed seven-point Likert scale questionnaire | 90.1 | NR |
| Chunhui, Ren. 2014 | A self-designed questionnaire | 98 | The outpatients were mostly satisfied with the service facilities, followed by medical equipment, and hygiene et al., and mostly dissatisfied with service attitude and medical costs. |
| Weiming, Shao et al., 2017 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 100 | The outpatients were mostly satisfied with clean hospital hygiene, and mostly dissatisfied with long waiting time. |
| Ying Zou et al., 2014 | A self-designed questionnaire | 99 | The outpatients were mostly satisfied with the hospital hygiene, and mostly dissatisfied with the arrangement of the outpatient department, long waiting time, and shortage of expert outpatients. |
| Mengzhu, Deng et al., 2013 | A self-designed questionnaire | 96.15 | The outpatients were mostly satisfied with the service attitude and environmental facility, and mostly dissatisfied with the waiting time and medical expenses. |
| Huilan, Luo et al., 2010 | A self-designed three- point Likert scale questionnaire based on IPSQ | 99 | The outpatients were mostly dissatisfied with long waiting time, hospital hygiene and outpatient procedures guidance. |
| Zulipiye.et al., 2016 | A self-designed five- point Likert scale questionnaire | 100 | Outpatients were mostly satisfied with hospital hygiene and medical service, and were mostly dissatisfied with long waiting time and complicated formalities during outpatients. |
| Jinping, Shu and Dian Zhou. 2016 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 94 | Outpatients were mostly dissatisfied with the outpatient process, including the registration and taking drugs et al., |
| Kai ling et al., 2009 | A self-designed four-point Likert scale questionnaire | 100 | Senior outpatients were mostly dissatisfied with the long waiting time. |
| Yu Li et al., 2011 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 99.5 | The outpatients were mostly satisfied with the doctor service attitude and environmental, and were mostly dissatisfied with the treatment time and health care costs. |
| Qinghua, Zhang and Zhanhe, Liu. | A self-designed three-point Likert scale questionnaire | 91 | The outpatients were mostly dissatisfied with charge offices and pharmacy. |
| Fanzhi, Meng et al., 2016 | NR | 100 | 94.6% residents showed satisfaction with the outpatient. The residents were mostly dissatisfied with low accessibility to various of drugs. |
| Jun Song et al., 2007 | A self-designed four-point Likert scale questionnaire | 93 | The patients were mostly satisfied with the examination time and guidance during outpatient. |
| Shi Guo et al., 2014 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 97.5 | Patients were mostly satisfied with the medical diagnosis and treatment, and were mostly dissatisfied with waiting time before seeing the doctors and medical costs. |
| Xunming, Ji et al., 2010 | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 98.82 | 86% outpatients were satisfied with the medical care at outpatients’ departments, and were mostly dissatisfied with professional skills, service attitude and time consuming. |
| Li Ren and Haixuan, Xu. | A self-designed five-point Likert scale questionnaire | 97.6 | The outpatients were mostly satisfied with examination time of the doctors, and mostly dissatisfied with waiting time for the examination and reports. |
| Guanghao, Jing and Shunfu, Piao. 2011 | A self-designed three-point Likert scale questionnaire | 99.5 | 90.3% outpatients were satisfied with the outpatient. The outpatients were mostly dissatisfied with complicated outpatient process, cold service attitude, unclear explanation, and long waiting time. |
| Lizhen, Deng and Suili, Rao. | A self-designed questionnaire based on the outpatient questionnaire designed by the ministry of health Guangzhou city | 85 | Outpatients were mostly satisfied with no corruption and good service attitude of the doctors and nurses. Outpatients were mostly dissatisfied with the service attitude of registration and payment offices. |
‡ IPSQ: Inpatient Satisfaction Questionnaire; * NR means not reported.
Satisfaction with hospital staff, hospital hygiene and facilities, outpatient process and management, and medical costs (n = 22).
| Studies | Satisfaction with Hospital Staff | Satisfaction with Hospital | Satisfaction with Outpatient Process and Management | Satisfaction with Medical Costs | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author and Year | Service Attitude or Communication with the Doctors | Service Attitude or Communication with the Nurses | Professional Skills | Service of the Guidance Medical Staff/Pre-Diagnosis Counters | Service Attitude of the Registration/Payment Offices | Easy Access to Hospital and Registration | Waiting Time | Diagnosis and Treatment Process | Ease of Complain (a Clear and Reliable | Medical Needs Being Met | ||
| Wenya, Yu et al., 2016 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||
| Jing Sun et al., 2015 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||
| Weiming Shao et al., 2017 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||
| Ying Zou et al., 2014 | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||||
| Mengzhu Deng et al., 2013 | * | * | * | * | * | |||||||
| Qing Lu et al., 2016 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | |||||
| Jing Zhao et al., 2015 | * | * | * | * | * | |||||||
| Huilan Luo et al., 2010 | * | * | * | |||||||||
| Zulipiye Tuerxun et al., 2016 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||
| Jinping Shu and Dian Zhou, 2016 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | |||
| Kai Ling et al., 2009 | * | * | * | |||||||||
| Yu Li, et al., 2011 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | |||
| Rong Xu and Xinzhen Jing. 2004 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||
| Qinghua Zhang and Zhanhe Liu. 2011 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | |||||
| Zhifan Meng, et al., 2016 | * | * | * | * | * | |||||||
| Jun Song et al., 2007 | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||||
| Shi Guo, et al., 2014 | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||||
| Xunming Ji, et al., 2010 | * | * | * | |||||||||
| Li Ren and Haixuan Xu. 2016 | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||||
| Guanghao Jing and Shunfu Piao. 2011 | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||||
| Lizhen, Deng and Suili, Rao 2006 | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | * | ||||
| Chunhui, Ren. 2014 | * | * | * | * | * | |||||||
* An asterisk mark represented that this factor was investigated in the study. Yellow color represented the most satisfied factors, and blue color represented the most dissatisfied factor.
Findings on factors associated with outpatient satisfaction (n = 18).
| Author and Year | Main Findings on the Relationship between Outpatient Satisfaction and Influencing Factors | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Patient Social-Demographic Factors | Medial Staff Factors | hygiene and Process Management | |
| Wenya, Yu et al., 2016 | (1) Outpatients’ socio-demographic characteristics (including sex, age, occupation, monthly income, residence, and marital status) were related to satisfaction to varying degrees. | Satisfactions with doctors and with nurses were significantly related to the overall satisfaction. | Satisfaction with hygiene had the weakest contribution to overall satisfaction. |
| Liyang, Tang. 2011 | Patients’ trust in medical service had the largest influence on patient’s satisfaction. | NR * | NR |
| Jing Sun et al., 2017 | (1) Outpatient with commercial insurance coverage is associated with satisfaction that is 1.73 times that of the uninsured ( | (1) “Patient–doctor relationship” is the strongest predictor of overall patient satisfaction (OR = 3.19, 95% CI: 2.83–3.59); | (1) Channel for praise and complain (OR = 1.39) was the major factors associated with the overall satisfaction of the elderly outpatient. |
| Jay Pan et al., 2015 | (1) Female are less dissatisfied; | NR | NR |
| Jinghua, Li et al., 2016 | (1) Men and singles were less likely to be satisfied with waiting time. | NR. | (1) Patients seeking outpatient care from tertiary hospitals were very satisfied with the care environment, whereas those in rural areas were less satisfied ( |
| Jinzhu, Xie et al., 2017 | Age, type of payment, and the self-rated health status were associated with outpatient satisfaction; | NR | NR |
| Chunlei, Han et al., 2012 | Patients’ demographic characteristics including occupation, monthly salary, and education level were associated with outpatient satisfaction. | NR | NR |
| Qing Lu et al., 2016 | Marital status, occupation, health insurance type, payment-method, and family income were correlated with outpatient satisfaction. | NR | NR |
| Jing Zhao et al., 2016 | NR | NR | Outpatient process was an independent factor influencing outpatient satisfaction. |
| Wenlong, Hu et al., 2007 | Age, gender and monthly income are not significantly associated with outpatient satisfaction, while level of education was significantly associated with outpatient satisfaction. | NR | NR |
| Yanxia, Yang et al., 2015 | There were no significant differences in patients’ sex, age, marriage, occupation and education on outpatient satisfaction. | NR | outpatient satisfaction was associated with waiting time. |
| Rong Xu and Xinzhen, Jing. 2004 | NR | The outpatient satisfaction was mostly associated with the satisfaction with the diagnosis and treatment of the doctor, and the service attitude of the doctors. | The outpatient satisfaction was mostly associated with the satisfaction with the medical cost and the arrangements during the wait. |
| Junjie, Sun and Shuangqing, Li. 2018 | NR | Communication with doctors, the degree of carefulness the doctors inquired, and the degree of the clarity the doctors explained the diseases are associated with outpatient satisfaction. | NR |
| Zhanwei, Zhou et al., 2011 | NR | Patients showed significant lower satisfaction with payment officers compared with doctors and nurses. The feeling of being respect during outpatient, professional skills of doctors and the service of the pre-diagnosis counters were associated with outpatient satisfaction. | Hospital hygiene and medical costs are associated with outpatient satisfaction. |
| Caoxin, Bao et al., 2015 | NR | The service attitude and professional skills of doctors are associated with outpatient satisfaction | Hospital reputation, the protection of privacy during diagnosis and waiting time are associated with outpatient satisfaction. |
| Zhixiang, Teng et al., 2009 | NR | NR | The levels of the hospitals are not associated with outpatient satisfaction in the first-time visit. |
| Jing Luan et al., 2013 | The age, gender, marital status, education level, monthly income and self-health evaluation are associated with outpatient satisfaction. | NR | NR |
| Jianjie Zhang. | Health-related knowledge is positively associated with outpatient satisfaction. | The professional skills were of significantly positive correlated with outpatient satisfaction. | Waiting time is not associated with outpatient satisfaction. |
* NR means not reported.