Advertisement
Table 6 The relationship between the association between patients' expectations and experiences on the one hand and patient satisfaction with complaints handling on the other hand (N = 279)
| Dependent variable: Satisfaction with complaints committee | adjusted R2 = 0.51 |
|---|---|
| Independent variables | |
| Independent variables in the equation | Beta (standardised) (p-value) |
| - Committee showed an impartial attitude | 0.45 (0.000) |
| - Committee showed sympathy for what the patient had been through | 0.13 (0.013) |
| - Committee gave clear information about the procedures | 0.14 (0.006) |
| - Committee made recommendations to hospital to make changes | 0.16 (0.002) |
| - Committee responded swiftly | 0.11 (0.032) |
| - Gender of patient (male (1), female (2)) | 0.14 (0.003) |
| - Impact of the incident underlying the complaint (0 = no harm to 3 = harm in three areas) | - 0.10 (0.037) |
| Independent variables not in the equation | B if put in model (p-value) |
| - Respectful treatment by committee | 0.07 (0.195) |
| - Committee listened to patient's account of what had happened | 0.10 (0.062) |
| - Committee investigated the incident | 0.10 (0.068) |
| - Committee made a decision on the validity of the complaint | -0.02 (0.678) |
| - Committee explained the rationale for the decision | 0.04 (0.480) |
| - Committee gave the opportunity to provide a personal account of what had happened | -0.01 (0.813) |
| - Level of education (1–5) | 0.01 (0.907) |
| - Age (years) | -0.02 (0.686) |
| Dependent variable: Satisfaction with hospital management | adjusted R 2 = 0.31 |
| Independent variables in the equation | Beta (standardised) (p-value) |
| - Hospital discussed the complaint with employees | 0.42 (0.000) |
| - Hospital reported what corrective measures had been taken | 0.20 (0.001) |
| - Impact of the incident underlying the complaint (0 = no harm to 3 = harm in three areas) | - 0.16 (0.004) |
| - Gender of patient (male (1), female (2)) | 0.11 (0.045) |
| Independent variables not in the equation | B if put in model (p-value) |
| - Level of education (1–5) | 0.10 (0.087) |
| - Age (years) | 0.01 (0.904) |
| Dependent variable: Satisfaction with medical professionals | adjusted R 2 = 0.33 |
| Independent variables in the equation | Beta (standardised) (p-value) |
| - Professional showed sympathy for what patient went through | 0.21 (0.004) |
| - Professional offered an apology | 0.22 (0.002) |
| - Professional explained how things had happened | 0.15 (0.022) |
| - Professional made efforts to restore the relationship | 0.17 (0.010) |
| - Impact of the incident underlying the complaint (0 = no harm to 3 = harm in three areas) | -0.14 (0.013) |
| Independent variables not in the equation | B if put in model (p-value) |
| - Professional admitted an error if an error was made | 0.10 (0.153) |
| - Gender of patient (male (1), female (2)) | 0.61 (0.280) |
| - Level of education (1–5) | -0.00 (0.949) |
| - Age (years) | -0.05 (0.420) |
