Patient Satisfaction: Comparative Study between Joint Commission International Accredited and Non-accredited Palestinian Hospitals

Abstract

Background: Patient satisfaction is one of the important indicators in the health system that should be considered when evaluating the quality of health services provided and the impact of accreditation systems. This study aims to assess the level of patient satisfaction in accredited and non-accredited hospitals in Palestine.Methods: Quantitative descriptive cross-sectional design used to compare patient satisfaction in two Palestinian hospitals. The researcher measured the patient satisfaction between October and November 2016 using the SERVQUAL tool to assess five dimensions of quality (reliability, assurance, tangibility, empathy and responsiveness). The sample size included was 332 inpatients, who were recruited by the researcher through convenient sampling method, and the data was analyzed using SPSS version 18. Results:The patients have a high level of satisfaction with a total mean of (4.34) out of (5) and a (0.70) standard deviation. The results indicated that there are statistically significant differences at the level (P ≤ 0.05) between the means of patient satisfaction relating to patient demographic characteristics (with the exception of gender), and also indicated that there are no statistically significant differences related to hospital characteristics. Moreover, for all satisfaction dimension patients have more satisfaction in non-accredited hospitals than accredited ones. Conclusion:The study indicated that there are no significant differences between the means of patient satisfaction attributed to accreditation status. The results reinforce that the patient perspective should also be given much importance in the health system, and certifies that it should be taken into consideration to ensure the quality of services provided by healthcare organizations.

The impact of hospital accreditation on the quality of healthcare: a systematic literature review

“…Despite the widely held belief that accreditation contributes to improving patient satisfaction and experience, most findings provide little evidence to support whether accreditation status or ratings are measurably linked to patient satisfaction and experience in a meaningful way. Multiple studies that compared accredited with non-accredited hospitals [ 21 , 48 , 70 , 71 , 77 , 78 ] or accredited hospitals at different accreditation levels [ 69 , 72 ] did not find any association. For instance, Sack et al [ 77 , 78 ] did not find a link between accreditation and patients’ perception of better quality, reflected by their recommendation rates of the institutions at the hospital level or the cardiology unit level.…”

“…Only 14 studies that assessed the impact of hospital accreditation on measurable patient-reported outcome parameters were found [21,48,53,55,[69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77][78]. Studies mainly used an observational cross-sectional design (n = 12).…”

Nivel de satisfacción de los pacientes egresados de un servicio de Clínica Médica del Paraguay

“…Se calcularon los percentiles de cada variable de la encuesta SERVQUAL aplicando estos parámetros: p0-p20: satisfacción muy baja, p21-p40: satisfacción baja, p41-p60: satisfacción media, p61-p80: satisfacción alta y p81-p100: satisfacción muy alta (28)(29)(30). Posteriormente, se tomó como punto de corte el percentil 60 de modo a dividir a los pacientes en satisfechos e insatisfechos (30)(31)(32)(33).…”

Users satisfaction of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Department users of the Hospital Nacional in 2018

“…Se calcularon los percentiles de cada variable del cuestionario SERVQUAL aplicando los siguientes parámetros: p0-p20: satisfacción muy baja, p21-p40: satisfacción baja, p41-p60: satisfacción media, p61-p80: satisfacción alta y p81-p100: satisfacción muy alta (23)(24)(25) . Finalmente, se dicotomizó la muestra en el percentil 60 de modo a agrupar a la muestra en satisfechas e insatisfechas (25)(26)(27)(28) . Se aplicó la prueba chi cuadrado a las variables nominales con el programa informó mala comunicación médico-paciente.…”