Evaluation of medical staff and patient satisfaction among healthcare services in several Wuhan public hospitals
Background. Satisfaction evaluation is widely used in healthcare systems around the world to improve healthcare service quality and levels, in order to obtain better health outcomes. In the evaluation of healthcare reform, patient and medical staff satisfaction with this reform is a key criterion. The aim of this study was to measure employee work satisfaction and patient satisfaction status in the Wuhan region, China; the unsatisfactory factors as discovered through the evaluation will be used as a reference by healthcare policy makers and management so that they can adopt reasonable and effective measures to decrease the risk of dissatisfaction in the future. Methods. A cross-sectional study was conducted in 14 medical institutions in Wuhan from October to November 2016. The medical institutions included public general hospitals (tertiary and secondary) and community healthcare service centers/stations (primary). Stratified sampling of target medical staff and patients was carried out and the final valid sample comprised a total of 696 medical staff and 668 patients. Results. In the Wuhan area, it was found that the reliability levels of medical staff work satisfaction scales and patient satisfaction scales comprised Cronbach's alpha=0.973 and Cronbach's alpha=0.949, respectively. The studies in Wuhan and Guangzhou showed that the psychometric characteristics of the scales were basically the same. The overall satisfaction levels of medical staff and patients were 58.28±14.60 and 65.82±14.66, respectively. The medical staff satisfaction ranking in sequence from most to least satisfied was: work itself, work environment and atmosphere, hospital management, practicing environment, and job rewards. The patient satisfaction ranking in sequence from most to least satisfied was: physician-patient relationship and communication, service organization and facilities, continuity and collaboration of medical care, access to relevant information and support, and healthcare and related services. There were differences in the overall satisfaction levels of medical staff based on gender, age, educational level, job title, nature of the job, employment status, and whether staff were at the standardized training stage (p<.05 or .01). There was no statistically significant difference in various demographic variables in terms of overall patient satisfaction (p>.05). Discussion. The overall satisfaction evaluation of medical staff was average. In the future, healthcare policy makers and management staff of medical institutions should focus on job rewards and practicing environment in order to decrease the risk of dissatisfaction amongst medical staff. This would allow them to increase their work happiness and sense of belonging, which in turn would allow them to provide better medical services to patients. The overall patient evaluation was satisfactory, with patients satisfied at all levels of the satisfaction evaluation.