Jiménez y VMC, Ortega VMC, Cruz AG, Cruz CM, Quintero BMM, Mendoza RE, Antúnez de la RMR, Solís PMT, Hernández TME

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 58-65
PDF size: 90.09 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Care management implies a process where the registered nurse mobilizes a series of human and environmental resources in order to keep and favor the care of people passing through experiences related to health alteration and it constantly perceives the interaction among nurse-background-patient. The practice of measuring patient’s satisfaction has become a means of general assessment of health services. So, this checking should be valid and reliable to allow a result generalization from it. Sanitary services are well-qualified when they present no deficiencies and satisfy internal and external users’ needs. Quality is determined by user’s satisfaction conditioners, such as equity, reliance, effectiveness, good treatment, respect, information, continuity and comfortableness. Objectives: To know and analyze satisfaction level from direct and indirect external users of the infirmary services of the National Institute of Cardiology Ignacio Chávez, and to clear out strong and weak points of the service given by the infirmary staff according to the external user observations or comments. Material and methods: Descriptive, transversal study, where the universe under study was every direct external patient in hospital and those ones attending the Institute external consult on February 18th 2002, as well as the indirect external users that were in companion of their relations in hospital or in external consult in the mentioned Institute on the quoted day. The sample was 109 users in hospital, 184 users attending external consult and 138 indirect external users, making an amount of 431 surveys altogether. The employ method was survey or poll, as an interview technique and it was used a questionnaire as a tool. This structural questionnaire was specifically created for researching about 14 items. Results: the satisfaction of UED has an index of 70%, while the UEI is of 74%, both of them being within the limits of a minimum satisfaction. Conclusions: the failures that internal and external users perceived were the following ones: deficient personal and individual treatment, scarce education for health and self-care, lack of predisposition to solve doubts, not enough explanations about the procedure during its performance, poor kindness and opportunities from nurses in the development of unsatisfactory procedures. The strong points were: kindness in treatment, good directions about the service at the entering moment and during the stay, good predisposition to clear out doubts from the user, good ability to carry out procedures, lasting time in giving assistance and time employed in performing procedures. To state the measurement of users’ satisfaction as an indicator of nurse carefulness result, this is an assertive method, and it is the second measurement carried out in this institution. This has been methodologically standardized, even though it may present inconsistency, which is being reviewed in order to modify it and go on monitoring this indicator.

REFERENCES

1. Díaz R. Satisfacción del paciente: principal motor y centro de los servicios sanitarios. Rev de Calidad Asistencial 2002; 17(1): 22-29.

2. Ramos GMJ. Fiabilidad y validez de un cuestionario de satisfacción del paciente en Guadalajara. Rev Semergen 2000; 26(11): 525-529.

3. Curso monográfico “Introducción a la calidad de los servicios de enfermería” Paquete didáctico. Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias. México, febrero 2001.

4. American Society for Quality Control. 5. Varo J. Gestión estratégica de la calidad en los servicios sanitarios. Ediciones Díaz de Santos, S.A. España 1994: 6.

5. Juran JM. The quality trilogy. Quality Progress. 1986: 19-24.

6. Lorenzo S, Mira J, Sánchez E. Gestión de calidad total y medicina basada en evidencia. Rev Medicina Clínica 2000; 114(12): 460-463.

7. Donabedian A. Exploration quality assessment and monitorig, Vol 1. Ann Arbor, Health Administration Press, 1980.

8. Pallares L et al. Guía práctica para la evaluación de la calidad de atención de enfermería. Olalla. Ediciones. Madrid, España. 1996: 30-33.

9. Kozier B et al. Conceptos y temas en la práctica de enfermería. Edit. Interamericana. 2a. ed. México, 1992: 654.

10. Casaus PI et al. Introducción a la gestión de enfermería. Fundación para el Desarrollo de la Enfermería. Olalla Ediciones. Madrid 1995.

11. Guillies A. Gestión de enfermería. Una aproximación a los sistemas. Ediciones Científicas y Técnicas, S.A. Masson. España 1994.

12. Sánchez CI et al. Guía de intervención en enfermería basada en evidencia científica. ACAOFEN. Santafé de Bogotá, Colombia. 1998: 83.

13. Quintana J. M. Encuesta de satisfacción a pacientes de servicios de urgencias de hospitales agudos. Rev Gaceta Sanitaria 1999; 13(1): 38-45.

14. Carey R et al. Using patient information to identify areas for service improvements. Health Care Management Review. USA 1981: 43.

15. Mira JJ y cols. Causas de satisfacción y de insatisfacción de los pacientes en hospitales y atención primaria. Revista de Calidad Asistencial 2002; 17(5): 273-283.

16. Miño G. Gestión por procesos y calidad asistencial. Rev JANO 2001; 61(1405): 10.

17. Bohigas LL. La satisfacción del paciente. Rev Gaceta Sanitaria 1995; 9: 283-286.

18. Cuesta AG et al. La calidad de la asistencia hospitalaria. Ediciones Doyma, SA de CV España 1995: 7-16.

19. Sáiz A y cols. Calidad percibida por los pacientes quirúrgicos en un hospital de alta complejidad. Revista de Calidad Asistencial 2002; 17(5): 284-291.

20. Prieto RMA, March CJ, López FM. Calidad percibida por usuarios de centros de salud y de aseguradoras privadas. Rev Atención Primaria 1999; 24(5): 259-266.