[Personalizing the reference level: gold standard to evaluate the quality of service perceived]

OBJECTIVE

To know the cutoff point at which in-house Nuclear Medicine Department (MND) customers consider that the quality of service is good (personalized cutoff).

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We conducted a survey of the professionals who had requested at least 5 tests to the Nuclear Medicine Department. A total of 71 doctors responded (response rate: 30%). A question was added to the questionnaire for the user to establish a cutoff point for which they would consider the quality of service as good. The quality non-conformities, areas of improvement and strong points of the six questions measuring the quality of service (Likert scale 0 to 10) were compared with two different thresholds: personalized cutoff and one proposed by the service itself a priori. Test statistics: binomial and Student's t-test for paired data.

RESULTS

A cutoff value of 7 was proposed by the service as a reference while 68.1% of respondents suggested a cutoff above 7 points (mean 7.9 points). The 6 elements of perceived quality were considered strong points with the cutoff proposed by the MND, while there were 3 detected with the personalized threshold. Thirteen percent of the answers were nonconformities with the service cutoff versus 19.2% with the personalized one, the differences being statistically significant (difference 95% CI 6.44%:0,83-12.06).

CONCLUSIONS

The final image of the perceived quality of an in-house customer is different when using the cutoff established by the Department versus the personalized cutoff given by the respondent.

[Assessment of the patient satisfaction with a Nuclear Medicine Service]

GOAL

To know the perceived quality and the levels of patient satisfaction with the Nuclear Medicine Service (MN).

METHODS

A cross-sectional descriptive study was performed. The authors designed a self-applied questionnaire based on a questionnaire from a survey created by the National Health Service of the UK. The answers of 32 items were analyzed, including 4 social-demographic questions and one open question. The authors recoded the variables related to service quality and recorded them as "in accordance" and "not in accordance." The validity of the questionnaire was measured using Cronbach's alpha and determination (R(2)) indexes. The authors used the χ(2), Student's T, ANOVA and linear regression analysis statistical tests.

RESULTS

A total of 179 questionnaires were analyzed (response rate: 36.6%, sampling error: 5.8%). Evaluation of general satisfaction and the recommendation of the NM Service obtained a mean score of 8.96 and 9.20 (1-10 scale) points, respectively. The most influential variable regarding general satisfaction was the general impression of the organization of the service. The strong points of the service were courtesy, general organizational image and cleanliness. The main areas for improvement were appointment change process and waiting list. There were no significant differences regarding satisfaction due to the social-demographic variables except for age.

CONCLUSION

This satisfaction survey has shown that patients are satisfied with the Nuclear Medicine Service and that it is a useful tool to detect the strong points and areas for improvement of the Service from the user's perspective.