IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2019i1p152-d301558.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combining Direct and Indirect Measurements to Assess Patients’ Satisfaction with the Quality of Public Health Services in Romania: Uncovering Structural Mechanisms and Their Implications

Author

Listed:
  • Elena Druică

    (Centre for Research in Applied Behavioural Economics, Faculty of Business and Administration, University of Bucharest, 030018 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Viorel Mihăilă

    (Centre for Research in Applied Behavioural Economics, Faculty of Business and Administration, University of Bucharest, 030018 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Marin Burcea

    (Faculty of Business and Administration, University of Bucharest; 030018 Bucharest, Romania)

  • Vasile Cepoi

    (The Romanian Authority for Quality Assurance in Healthcare, 060022 Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

Introduction: Patients’ satisfaction was extensively researched over the last decades, given its role in building loyalty, compliance to treatment, prevention, and eventually higher levels of wellbeing and improved health status. Patients’ feedback on the perceived quality of health services can be incorporated into practice; therefore, understanding factors and mechanisms responsible for patients’ satisfaction allows providers to tailor targeted interventions. Method: A questionnaire assessing patients’ perception of the quality of health services was administered to a country-representative sample of 1500 Romanian patients. Using a partial least squares—path modeling approach (PLS-PM), with cross-sectional data, we developed a variance-based structural model, emphasizing the mediating role of trust and satisfaction with various categories of health services. Results: We confirmed the mediating role of trust in shaping the relationship between the procedural accuracy of health professionals, along with the perceived intensity of their interaction with patients, and patients’ experienced quality of the health services. We confirmed the mediating role of satisfaction by the categories of services in the relationship between waiting time on the premises, attention received, and the perceived reliability of the information received, as predictors, and the experienced quality of the health services. In addition, indirect assessment of patients’ satisfaction is a good predictor for direct assessment, thereby affirming the idea that the results of the two types of evaluations converge. Discussions: One of the most efficient solutions to increase both patients’ satisfaction and their compliance is to empower the communication dimension between patients and health practitioners. Given the non-linear relationships among variables, we advocate that, unless the nature of the relationships between satisfaction and its predictors is understood, practical interventions could fail. The most relevant variable for intervention is the degree of attention patients perceive they received. We suggest three methods to turn waiting time into attention given to patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena Druică & Viorel Mihăilă & Marin Burcea & Vasile Cepoi, 2019. "Combining Direct and Indirect Measurements to Assess Patients’ Satisfaction with the Quality of Public Health Services in Romania: Uncovering Structural Mechanisms and Their Implications," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-18, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:p:152-:d:301558
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/1/152/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/1/152/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pascoe, Gregory C. & Attkisson, C. Clifford & Roberts, Robert E., 1983. "Comparison of indirect and direct approaches to measuring patient satisfaction," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 359-371, January.
    2. Acedo, Francisco J. & Jones, Marian V., 2007. "Speed of internationalization and entrepreneurial cognition: Insights and a comparison between international new ventures, exporters and domestic firms," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 236-252, September.
    3. Susan P Sparkes & Rifat Atun & Till Bӓrnighausen, 2019. "The impact of the Family Medicine Model on patient satisfaction in Turkey: Panel analysis with province fixed effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, January.
    4. Pascoe, Gregory C., 1983. "Patient satisfaction in primary health care: A literature review and analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 6(3-4), pages 185-210, January.
    5. Sitzia, John & Wood, Neil, 1997. "Patient satisfaction: A review of issues and concepts," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 45(12), pages 1829-1843, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hekkert, Karin Dorieke & Cihangir, Sezgin & Kleefstra, Sophia Martine & van den Berg, Bernard & Kool, Rudolf Bertijn, 2009. "Patient satisfaction revisited: A multilevel approach," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 68-75, July.
    2. Vanacore, Amalia & Pellegrino, Maria Sole, 2021. "Testing inter-group ranking heterogeneity: do patient characteristics matter for prioritization of quality improvements in healthcare service?," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    3. Diana Rofail & Fiona Taylor & Antoine Regnault & Anna Filonenko, 2011. "Treatment Satisfaction Instruments for Different Purposes during a Product’s Lifecycle," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 4(4), pages 227-240, December.
    4. Smaranda Adina Cosma & Marius Bota & Cristina Fleșeriu & Claudiu Morgovan & Mădălina Văleanu & Dan Cosma, 2020. "Measuring Patients’ Perception and Satisfaction with the Romanian Healthcare System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Xesfingi, Sofia & Karamanis, Dimitrios, 2015. "In- and Out-patient satisfaction assessment: the case of a greek General Hospital," MPRA Paper 66672, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Susan P Sparkes & Rifat Atun & Till Bӓrnighausen, 2019. "The impact of the Family Medicine Model on patient satisfaction in Turkey: Panel analysis with province fixed effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, January.
    7. Pablo Cabrera-Barona & Thomas Blaschke & Stefan Kienberger, 2017. "Explaining Accessibility and Satisfaction Related to Healthcare: A Mixed-Methods Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 133(2), pages 719-739, September.
    8. Weinhold, Ines & Gurtner, Sebastian, 2018. "Rural - urban differences in determinants of patient satisfaction with primary care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 76-85.
    9. Winfried Zinn & Sebastian Sauer & Richard Göllner, 2016. "The German Inpatient Satisfaction Scale," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(2), pages 21582440166, April.
    10. Francisco Javier Forcadell & Fernando Úbeda, 2022. "Individual entrepreneurial orientation and performance: the mediating role of international entrepreneurship," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 875-900, June.
    11. Broome, Kieran & Worrall, Linda & Fleming, Jennifer & Boldy, Duncan, 2012. "Evaluation of flexible route bus transport for older people," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 85-91.
    12. Hyojung Tak & Gregory Ruhnke & Ya-Chen Shih, 2015. "The Association between Patient-Centered Attributes of Care and Patient Satisfaction," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 8(2), pages 187-197, April.
    13. Acedo, Francisco J. & Coviello, Nicole & Agustí, María, 2021. "Caution ahead! The long-term effects of initial export intensity and geographic dispersion on INV development," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 56(6).
    14. Mikael Hilmersson & Roger Schweizer & Sylvie Chetty, 2022. "The Relationship Between Timing, Speed, and Performance in Foreign Market Network Entry," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 325-349, June.
    15. Rui Xue & Gongming Qian & Zhengming Qian & Lee Li, 2021. "Entrepreneurs’ Implicit and Explicit Achievement Motives and Their Early International Commitment," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 91-121, March.
    16. Głodowska Agnieszka & Pera Bożena & Wach Krzysztof, 2019. "International Strategy as the Facilitator of the Speed, Scope, and Scale of Firms’ Internationalization," Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, Sciendo, vol. 27(3), pages 55-84, September.
    17. Gonçalo Rodrigues Brás & Miguel Torres Preto, 2021. "The consequences of intrapreneurship in exporting firms: a structural-model approach," CeBER Working Papers 2021-06, Centre for Business and Economics Research (CeBER), University of Coimbra.
    18. Nik Aida Nik Adib & Mohd Ismail Ibrahim & Azriani Ab Rahman & Raishan Shafini Bakar & Nor Azni Yahaya & Suria Hussin & Wan Nor Arifin, 2018. "Translation and Validation of the Malay Version of the Parents’ Satisfaction Scale (PSS-M) for Assessment of Caregivers’ Satisfaction with Health Care Services for Children with Autism Spectrum Disord," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-14, November.
    19. Guercini, Simone & Milanesi, Matilde, 2020. "Heuristics in international business: A systematic literature review and directions for future research," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 26(4).
    20. Petrou, Andreas P. & Hadjielias, Elias & Thanos, Ioannis C. & Dimitratos, Pavlos, 2020. "Strategic decision-making processes, international environmental munificence and the accelerated internationalization of SMEs," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(5).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2019:i:1:p:152-:d:301558. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.