Konya’nın Hadim ilçesi kırsal kesimindeki birinci basamak sağlık hizmetlerinden hasta memnuniyeti

Year 2020, , 133 - 142, 27.12.2020

Nimetcan Mehmet , Yusuf Karapınar Ayhan Uludağ

https://doi.org/10.20518/tjph.714336

Cited By: 1

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı Konya ili Hadim ilçesinin bir mahallesinde bulunan Aile Sağlığı Merkezi’nin (ASM) çalışmaları ile buradan hizmet alan hastaların memnuniyetinin değerlendirilmesidir. Yöntem: Çalışma, kırsal yerleşim olan Konya ili Hadim ilçesine bağlı Gezlevi mahallesinde yaşayan kişilerin anket sorularını kendilerinin yanıtlaması ve araştırmacıların yüz yüze görüşmeleri ile verilerin toplanması şeklinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Hasta görüşlerinin değerlendirilmesi için Genel/Aile Hekimliği(EUROPEP) anketinin Türkçe versiyonu kullanılmıştır. Çalışma grubu, ASM’nden bir yıllık süre içinde hizmet alan ve mahallede ikamet eden 18 yaş üstü kişiler arasından rastgele seçilmiştir. Bulgular: 230 katılımcının yaş ortalaması 38.2 (± 1.1 yıl) olup, 18 ile 88 arasında değişmektedir. Katılımcıların yarısından fazlası erkektir (% 62.6). Hastaların çoğunun memnun olduğu alanlar “Doktorunun onları dinlemesi %96.5”; “Fiziki muayene %96.1”; “Kayıtlarını ve verilerini gizli tutması %90.4”; “Muayene esnasında yeterli zaman ayırması %89.6” ve “Ona sorunlarından bahsetmeyi kolaylaştırması %86.1” olmasına rağmen memnun olmadıkları alanlar ise şu şekildedir: “Aile hekimiyle telefon aracılığıyla konuşabilmesi %75.2”; “Muayene için telefonla ulaşabilmesi %72.6”; “Uygun randevu %62.2”; “Sağlık durumu ile ilgili duygusal problemleriyle başa çıkması %65,7”; “Tıbbi kararlara katılabilmesi %55.2”. Sonuç: Birinci basamak sağlık hizmetlerinden genel memnuniyet düzeyi % 78,7'dir. İncelenen alanlar arasında en yüksek memnuniyet 'doktor-hasta ilişkisinde' gözlenirken ‘tıbbi kararlara katılım’ konusunda memnuniyet düşüktür.

Keywords

Aile sağlığı merkezi, hasta memnuniyeti, kırsal bölge sakinleri

Patient satisfaction with primary healthcare services in a rural area of Hadim county, Konya

Abstract

Objective: Evaluation of patient satisfaction is widely used as a tool to measure healthcare quality. The aim of this study is to evaluate patient satisfaction with Family Health Centre services (FHC) in a village of Hadim county, Konya province, Turkey. Methods: This study was carried out in a rural area and data was collected using self-administered questionnaires and face-to-face interviews with people who live in Gezlevi village, Konya. Turkish versions of the Patients Evaluate General/Family Practice (EUROPEP) questionnaire was used. The study sample was randomly selected among adults (>18) who live in the village who visited the FMC within a one-year period. Results: The mean age of the 230 participants was 38.2 ± 1.1 years and ranged from 18 to 88 years. More than half of the participants were males (62.6%). A majority of the patients were satisfied for the domains: “the doctor listens to them, 96.5%”; “Physical examination, 96.1%”; “Keeping their records and data confidential, 90.4%”; “Enough time during consultation, 89.6%”; “Making it easy to tell him or her about their problem, 86.1%”. However, the participants were less satisfied with the domains: “Being able to speak to the GP on the telephone, 75.2%”; “Getting through to the practice on the telephone, 72.6%”; “Suitable appointment, 62.2%”; “Helping deal with emotional problems related to health status, 65.7%”; “involved in decisions about their medical care, 55.2%”. Conclusion: Overall satisfaction level was 78.7% with primary healthcare services. Among the investigated domains, highest satisfaction was observed in the ‘doctor–patient relationship’ while dissatisfaction was observed in the involvement of patients about decisions regarding their medical care.

Keywords

Family health centre, patients satisfaction, rural residents

References

• 1. Mackey S, Hatcher D, Happell B, Cleary M. Primary health care as a philosophical and practical framework for nursing education: rhetoric or reality? Contemp Nurse 2013:45: 79-84.
• 2. Alma Ata Declaration on Primary Health Care. http://www.who.int/publications/almaata_declaration_en.pdf (accessed October 05, 2018).
• 3. Papanikolaou V, Zygiaris S. Service quality perceptions in primary health care centres in Greece. Health Expect 2014: 17: 197-207.
• 4. Maisey S, Steel N, Marsh R, Gillam S, Fleetcroft R, et al. Effects of payment for performance in primary care: qualitative interview study. J Health Serv Res Policy 2008: 13: 133-139.
• 5. Papp R, Borbas I, Dobos E, Bredehorst M, Jaruseviciene L, et al. Perceptions of quality in primary health care: perspectives of patients and professionals based on focus group discussions. BMC Fam Pract 2014: 15: 128
• 6. Adhikari NKJ, Fowler RA, Bhagwanjee S, Rubenfeld GD: Critical care and the global burden of critical illness in adults. Lancet 2010; 376:1339–1346.
• 7. White F, Nanan DJ: International and global health, in Wallace RB, Kohatsu N (eds): Maxcy-Rosenau-Last. Public Health and Preventive Medicine. 15th ed. New York, McGraw Hill, 2008, chapt 76, pp 1251–1258.
• 8. Atun R, Aydın S, Chakraborty S, et al. Universal health coverage in Turkey: enhancement of equity. The Lancet 2013:382: 65–99.
• 9. TR MoH, Family Medicine Directorate. http://ailehekimligi.gov.tr/aile-hekimlii/tuerkiyedeki-aile-hekimlii.html (accessed October 05, 2018).
• 10. Tatar M, Mollahaliloglu S, Sahin B, et al. Turkey: Health system review. Health Systems in Transition 2011:13: 1–186.
• 11. World Bank. 2013. Turkey – Performance Based Contracting Scheme in Family Medicine: Design and Achievements. Washington DC: World Bank.
• 12. County local government homepage. www.hadim.bel.tr assess (15.04.2017)
• 13. Wunsch D. Survey research. Determining sample size and representative response. Business education form 1985;40(5):31-6.
• 14. Wensing M, Mainz J, grol R. A standardised instrument for patient evaluations of general practice care in Europe. Eur J gen Pract. 2000: 6:82-7
• 15. Akturk Z, Dagdeviren N, Sahin EM, Ozer C, Yaman H, Goktas O, et al. Patients evaluate physicians: the EUROPEP instrument. Journal of 9 Eylul University Medical Faculty. 2002: 3:153-60.
• 16. Al-Sakkak MA, Al-Nowaiser NA, Al-Khashan HI, Al-Abdrabulnabi AA, Jaber RM. Patient satisfaction with primary health care services in Riyadh. audi Med J. 2008: 29(3):432-6.
• 17. Abdullah H. Al-Doghaither, Badreldin M. Abdelrhman, Abdalla A.W. Saeed, Abdullah A. Al-Kamil, MCommH, and Mohieldin M. Majzoub. patients’ satisfaction with primary health care centers services in Kuwait City, Kuwait. J Family Community Med. 2001 Sep-Dec; 8(3): 59–65.
• 18. Hemadeh R, Hammoud R, Kdouh O, Jaber T, Ammar L. Patient satisfaction with primary healthcare services in Lebanon. Int J Health Plann Manage. 2018 Sep 26. doi: 10.1002/hpm.2659
• 19. Mohammad-Reza Sohrabi and Rima Mohammad Albalushi. Clients’ satisfaction with primary health care in Tehran: A cross-sectional study on Iranian Health Centers. J Res Med Sci. 2011: 16(6): 756–762.
• 20. Zekeriya Aktürk, Derya Ateşoğlu & Esra Çiftçi. Patient satisfaction with family practice in Turkey: Three-year trend from 2010 to 2012. European Journal of General Practice 2015: Vol.21(4)
• 21. Prakash B. Patient satisfaction. J Cutan Aesthet Surg. 2010;3(3):151-155. doi:10.4103/0974-2077.74491
• 22. Aisha Jalil, Rubeena Zakar, Muhammad Zakria Zakar and Florian Fischer. Patient satisfaction with doctor-patient interactions: a mixed methods study among diabetes mellitus patients in Pakistan. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017: 17: 155
• 23. Kaya SD, Maimaiti N, Gorkemli H. Assessing patient satisfaction with obstetrics and gynaecology clinics/outpatient department in university hospital Konya, Turkey.Int J Res Med Sci 2017;5:3794-7.
• 24. Dominique Ansel, James A. G. Crispo, Benjamin Simard, and Lise M. Bjerre. Interventions to reduce wait times for primary care appointments: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017: 17: 295
• 25. Wait Time Alliance. Time to close the gap [http://www.waittimealliance.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/FINAL-EN-WTA-Report-Card.pdf]. Accessed 12 December 2018
• 26. Pickin DM, O'Cathain A, Sampson F, Dixon S. Evaluation of Advanced Access in the National Primary Care Collaborative. Br J Gen Pract. 2004:54(502):334–340.
• 27. Goodall S, Montgomery AA, Pickin DM, Edwards S, Sampson F, Simons L, Lattimer V. Does advanced access improve access to primary health care? questionnaire survey of patients. Br J Gen Pract. 2007:57(541):615–21.
• 28. Lattimer V, Steve G, Felicity T, Eileen T, Mark M, Joanne T, Helen S, Michael M, Hugh B, Alan G. Safety and effectiveness of nurse telephone consultation in out of hours primary care: randomised controlled trial. Br Med J. 1998:317:1054–9.
• 29. Pollock AV. Outcome indicators. J R Soc Med. 1993: 86:311
• 30. Mahejabin, F., Khan, R., & Parveen, S. Patients Satisfaction with Services Obtained from a Health Care Centre in Rural Bangladesh. Delta Medical College Journal, 2016;4(2):77-82.