Patients In The Medical Services Market, Research On The Availability And Satisfaction With Medical Services

1. Abstract

Analysis of current studies on satisfaction with healthcare services reveals the main factors influencing the perceived satisfaction of patients. The quality of interactions with healthcare personnel, access to healthcare services, healthcare patterns and cultural factors are key to ensuring a positive patient experience. In addition, analysis of differences between patient groups can help develop more personalized approaches to healthcare [5]. It is worth mentioning that the observed trends in satisfaction with healthcare services indicate a positive development in the quality of healthcare, but continuous research and improvements are necessary to ensure further growth in this area. Reviewing data from previous studies allows us to assess what factors influence their experience. This helps both healthcare personnel and managers of healthcare facilities to make better decisions, improve the healthcare system and adapt services to the needs of patients [6].

2. Key words:

Medical service, management of access to medical services, satisfaction with medical services

3. Material and Methods

The target statistical group was considered to be the patients of one of the medical entities in Poland - the non-public health care facility Pilawa. Belonging to this group is a feature that unites this group, while other features such as age, gender, level of education distinguish such a group from each other. The study is subject to the phenomenon of feeling satisfaction with medical services. By definition, this is a partial study. The sample includes people who voluntarily undertook the effort to complete the survey. It seems, therefore, that the data obtained reveal problems and truly show the image of this phenomenon. The author hopes that the results obtained in this study are representative of the group of patients of this facility and their generalization will enable planning solutions and anticipating the development of the situation in the future. The aim of the study was to assess the availability and satisfaction with medical services of patients in a city located in the Mazovian Voivodeship, Garwolin County in Poland. According to the Central Statistical Office, the number of inhabitants is 4,557 people. The health center provides care to 5,000 patients from the city and surrounding towns. In the work, the author identified the following problems, which she formulated as research problems. It was assumed that gender, age, education affect the overall assessment of satisfaction with medical services, similarly gender, age and education affect the assessment of the quality of work of nursing staff, their state of knowledge and competence. It was assumed that depending on gender, age and education, the assessment of showing care and kindness towards patients varies. It was assumed that depending on the gender, age and education of patients, the ability of nurses to communicate with the patient and the ability to provide emotional support are assessed. It was also assumed that patients assess emotional support and meeting psychological needs by nurses depending on gender, age and education. It was assumed that patients assess nurses’ skills in educating patients about self-care activities depending on gender, age and education. The study was conducted over a period of six months.

4. Results and Discussion

The vast majority of respondents (87%) agreed that the reception staff were polite and dealt with their issues quickly. 9% of respondents had the opposite opinion. Detailed data are presented in Table 1. The doctor’s courtesy and commitment during the visit was confirmed by 96% of respondents. Detailed data are presented in Table 2. The overall satisfaction rating is the sum of the answers to all survey questions. The higher the number of points, the higher the patient satisfaction. The maximum number of points that the respondents could award was 70 points. The average rating was 60.1 points (SD=10.31). The lowest rating recorded among the respondents was 15 points (N=1), and the highest was 65 points (N=64). It is worth noting that these ratings were made by 64% of the respondents, which means very high satisfaction with the services provided in the facility under study. Women and men do not differ in their ratings of satisfaction with the services of the primary healthcare facility (U=1153; p>0.05). Detailed data are presented in Table 3. The respondents also did not differ in their assessment of satisfaction with medical services taking into account their age (H=3.0; p>0.05). The education of the respondents also does not significantly differentiate them in terms of the ratings they gave for medical services (H=0.224; p>0.05). The analysis of the assessment of individual aspects of the work of the medical facility by gender did not reveal any significant differences between women and men in any of the aspects discussed in the study. Detailed data are presented in Table 4. A similar observation concerns age, where regardless of the age group, the respondents assessed their satisfaction with the discussed aspects of the work of medical personnel at a similar level. Detailed data are presented in Table 5.

5. Discussion

The main function of primary health care is to provide medical services at the local level. The more qualitatively adequate help patients receive in relation to their expectations, the more they accept medical activities, health education, and sometimes the burdensome diagnostic process, which promotes healing processes and individualization of services. An important factor influencing the assessment was the perception of staff involvement and the time spent on the visit. A primary health care nurse is just as important as the doctor, as confirmed by research. She is often the first point of contact in a clinic or during a home visit. In surveys, there is a tendency to highly evaluate the work of nurses due to their good attitude to patients, subjective treatment, and respect for their dignity. This is also shown by our own research. The tendency to link good communication or the so-called availability of a nurse with satisfaction with medical services is revealed in research around the world and has a colossal significance for progress in treatment. The results of the study of patients’ opinions from primary healthcare in Pilawa show that knowledge from the field of social psychology is useful or even necessary, which allows for a wise and conscious individualization of the approach to the patient depending on gender, age, education, aimed at optimizing the effects of treatment. This comes down to the issue of understanding the message - hence some differences between the groups. Comparing the results of our own research to the analyses available in the literature, 87% of people taking part in the survey were satisfied with the kindness of the reception staff. These results compare favorably with the analysis by Plentar et al. from 2015, in which only slightly more than half of the participants in the study assessed the receptionists as friendly people, 27% described them as sometimes friendly and 13% of people who did not encounter any kindness were noted [13]. In turn, the publication by Krystyna Kurowska and Agnieszka Sawicka from 2016 examining the efficiency of the reception staff showed that 83.7% of the respondents assessed their actions positively [23]. The respondents highly assessed the work of the doctor, as 96% of the participants stated that the doctor was involved, polite, provided information about their condition in an understandable way and received the way of providing the information positively. Similarly, Plentara et al. in 2015, analyzing patient satisfaction in relation to similar factors, presented results indicating that 86% of the respondents were informed about the name of the disease entity by the doctor. Subsequently, the causes of symptoms reported by patients were explained by the doctor in slightly less than 70% of cases, while 16% of the respondents learned about them sometimes and 12% of the survey participants never learned about them [13].

6. Conclusions

1. The research hypotheses were not confirmed in our own research, formulated on the basis of previous research, assumptions or ideas, and showed that the specificity of a healthcare entity significantly changes the image of the functioning of the facility in relation to others, which limits the possibility of generalizing the study results only to clinics of this type. 2. Gender, age, education of the respondents facility did not significantly affect the assessment of the quality of the nursing staff’s work, their knowledge and competence. Similarly, in the case of the assessment of showing care and kindness towards patients, they did not differentiate the assessments of the respondents. Also in the matter of the nurses’ ability to communicate with the patient, readiness to provide emotional support and education 3. The age of respondents does not affect the level of satisfaction with medical services. 4. The education of the respondents did not significantly differentiate opinions on satisfaction with the availability of medical services.

Literature

1. EA Fradgley, CL Paul, J Bryant. Consumer participation in quality improvements for chronic disease care: development and evaluation of an interactive patient-centered survey to identify preferred service initiatives. J Med Internet Res 2014; 16(12): e292.

2. M Tanniru, J Khuntia. Dimensions of Patient Experience and Overall Satisfaction in Emergency Departments. Journal of Patient Experience”. 2019; Vol. 4, No. 3, pp: 95-100.

3. A Wen, KA Schulman. Can team-based care improve patient satisfaction? A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. PLoSOne 2022; 9(7): e100603.

4. FEB Setyawan, S Supriyanto, F Tunjungsari. Medical Staff Services Quality on Patients Satisfaction Based on SERVQUAL Dimensions. International Journal Public Health Research. 2021; Vol. 8, No. 1: pp. 57-57.

5. M Faezipoura, S Ferreiraa. A system dynamics perspective of patient satisfaction in Healthcare, Procedia Computer Science. 2019; 16: 154.

6. Kołpa M, Jurkiewicz B and Sobyra A. Wizerunek pielęgniarki oraz czynniki determinujące zadowolenie z opieki pielęgniarskiej na oddziale chirurgii jednego dnia. Pielęgniarstwo Chirurgiczne i Angiologiczne. 2016; 3: 100-105.

7. Ksakiewicz D. Zarządzanie w pielęgniarstwie. PZWL Warszawa. 2018.

8. Sree K, Mohanty S, Lakshmi R. Mentoring in Medical Education: Impact on the Undergraduate Student Journal of Research in Medical Education & Ethics 8, 1, March, 2018, p. 69-73.

9. Levinson DJ. The seasons of a man’s life, Knopf, New York. 1978.

10. Kram K, Mentoring Alternatives: The Role of Peer Relationships in Career Development. Academy of Management Journal 1985; 28(1): 110-132.

11. Murphy W. Reverse mentoring at work: Fostering cross-generational learning and developing millennial leaders. Human Resource Management 2012; 51(4): 549-573.

12. Haggard DL, Dougherty TW, Turban DB & Wilbanks J. Who Is a Mentor?: A Review of Evolving Definitions and Implications for Research. Journal of Management 2011; 37(1): 280-304

13. Bąkiewicz M, Mentoring, coaching i tutoring jako nowe metody wsparcia studenta w procesie kształcenia - zarys problematyki. J. Bałachowicz, A. Rowicka (red.), Nowoczesny wychowawca - tutor, mentor, coach, Wyższa Szkoła Pedagogiczna im. Janusza Korczaka, Warszawa 2013; s. 37-43.

14. Bhatia A, Singh N, Dhaliwal U. Mentoring for first year medical students: humanising medical education. Indian Journal of Medical Ethics 2013;10(2):100-3.

15. Baran M. Uwarunkowania skuteczności monitoringu w organizacji, PWN, Warszawa 2018.

16. Sidor-Rządkowska M. Coaching kariery. Doradztwo zawodowe w warunkach współczesnego rynku pracy Wolters Kluwer, 2018.

17. Baran M. Uwarunkowania skuteczności mentoringu w organizacji, PWN, Warszawa 2018.

18. Stokes P, Merrick L. Designing Mentoring Schemes for Organizations, [in:] J. Passmore et al. (ed.), The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of the Psychology of Coaching and Mentoring 2013; p. 210-212.

19. Altus J. Answering the Call: How Group Mentoring Makes a Difference, Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 2015; Vol. 23 No. 2: pp. 100-115.

20. Kanafa-Chmielewska D. Wybrane aspekty współpracy organizacyjnej. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 2020; 31-35

21. Zachary L. The Mentor’s Guide, Jossey Bass, San Francisco 2010.

22. Bakiera L. Mentoring rozwojowy jako przykład komplementarności międzypokoleniowej, E-mentor 2016; 5 (67).

23. Newell D. Coaching i mentoring. Strategie, taktyki, techniki, PWN, Warszawa 2018; s. 54.

24. Piwowar-Sulej K. Profesjonalne zarządzanie szkoleniami w organizacjach. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 2019; 60-90.

25. Łużniak Piecha M, Kaczkowska Serafińska M, Lenton A. Mentoring odwrócony – korzyści dla organizacji. Edukacja Ekonomistów i Menedżerów 2016; 2 (40): 101-115.

26. Rakowska A, Mącik R. Zaangażowanie pracownika a satysfakcja z pracy – modelowanie zależności z wykorzystaniem PLS-SEM, Przegląd Organizacji 2016; 5: s. 48-58.

27. Baran M, Sypniewska B. The influence of mentoring on work engagement and the relationship with the superior in organizations in Poland. Organization Review, No. 6, 2019; 953: pp. 52-59

28. Zachary L. Creating a Mentoring Culture. Washington, DC: Center for Association Leadershi 2012.

29. Ritchie A & Genoni, P. Group Mentoring Professionalism: A Programme Evaluation. Library Management 2012; 23(1/2): 78.

30. Olorunfemi Olaolorunpo Mentoring in Nursing: A Concept Analysis International Journal of Caring Sciences January-April 2019; Volume 12 | Issue 1: 142-148.

31. Osaghae DC. Mentoring in the medical profession: An overview. Journal of Medicine and Biomedical Research. 2012; 11(2): 5-8.

32. Froneman K, Du Plessis E, Koen MP. ‘Effective educator–student relationships in nursing education to strengthen nursing students’ resilience’, Curationis. 2016; 39(1): a1595.

33. Sosa T. ‘Students’ views on what identifies teachers as effective’, Journal of Research in Education. 2011; 21(2): 118-132

34. Schwerdtle P, Morphet J, Hall H. A scoping review of mentorship of health personnel to improve the quality of health care in low and middle-income countries Globalization and Health. 2017; 13: 1-8.

35. Nash S & Scammel J. Skills to ensure success inmentoring and other workplace learning approaches. Nursing Times 2010; 106: 17-20.

36. Zhang Y, Qian Y, Wu J, Wen F & Zhang Y. Theeffectiveness and implementation of mentoring programfor newly graduated nurses: A systematic review.NurseEducation Today. 2016; 7: 136-144.

37. Olorunfeni O. Mentoring in Nursing: A Concept Analysis International Journal of Caring Sciences. 2019; 1: 142-148.

38. Hafsteinsdóttir TB, van der Zwaag AM, Schuurmans MJ. Leadership mentoring in nursing research, career development and scholarly productivity: A systematic review. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2017; 75: 21-34.

39. Huybrecht S, Loeckx W, Quaeyhaeqens Y. Mentoring in nursing education: perceived characteristics of mentors and the consequences of mentor- ship. Nurse Educ Today. 2011; 31(3): 274-8.

40. Jerilyn Hoover, Adam D Koon, Erica N Rosser and Krishna D Rao. Mentoring the working nurse: a scoping review Human Resources for Health. 2020; 18: 52: 1-10.

41. Dinner DJ, Wheeler M. Mentoring i coaching w pielęgniarstwie. Przewodnik. Genewa: ICN; 2017.

42. Donner J, Wheeler M. Coaching w pielęgniarstwie. Wprowadzenie. Genewa Indianapolis: ICN – Sigma Theta Tau International; 2019.

43. Clutterbuck D, Megginson D. Mentoring executives and directors. London: Butterworth; 2019. p. 3.

Citation

Joanna Jasińska, Agnieszka Nowacka. Patients In The Medical Services Market, Research On The Availability And Satisfaction With Medical Services. Annals of Clinical and Medical Case Reports 2024