CDC STACKS serves as an archival repository of CDC-published products including scientific findings, journal articles, guidelines, recommendations, or other public health information authored or co-authored by CDC or funded partners.
As a repository, CDC STACKS retains documents in their original published format to ensure public access to scientific information.
i
Use of a customer satisfaction survey by health care regulators: a tool for total quality management.
-
1997 May-Jun
-
Source: Public Health Rep. 112(3):206-211
[PDF-1.08 MB]
Details:
-
Alternative Title:Public Health Rep
-
Personal Author:
-
Description:To conduct a survey of health care providers to determine the quality of service provided by the staff of a regulatory agency; to collect information on provider needs and expectations; to identify perceived and potential problems that need improvement; and to make changes to improve regulatory services.|The authors surveyed health care providers using a customer satisfaction questionnaire developed in collaboration with a group of providers and a research consultant. The questionnaire contained 20 declarative statements that fell into six quality domains: proficiency, judgment, responsiveness, communication, accommodation, and relevance. A 10% level of dissatisfaction was used as the acceptable performance standard.|The survey was mailed to 324 hospitals, nursing homes, home care agencies, hospices, ambulatory care centers, and health maintenance organizations. Fifty-six percent of provider agencies responded; more than half had written comments. The three highest levels of customer satisfaction were in courtesy of regulatory staff (90%), efficient use of onsite time (84%), and respect for provider employees (83%). The three lowest levels of satisfaction were in the judgment domain; only 44% felt that there was consistency among regulatory staff in the interpretation of regulations, only 45% felt that interpretations of regulations were flexible and reasonable, and only 49% felt that regulations were applied objectively. Nine of 20 quality indicators had dissatisfaction ratings of more than 10%; these were considered priorities for improvement.|Responses to the survey identified a number of specific areas of concern; these findings are being incorporated into the continuous quality improvement program of the office.
-
Subjects:
-
Source:
-
Pubmed ID:9160054
-
Pubmed Central ID:PMCnull
-
Document Type:
-
Place as Subject:
-
Volume:112
-
Issue:3
-
Collection(s):
-
Main Document Checksum:
-
Download URL:
-
File Type:
Related Documents
-
- No DescriptionNo DescriptionNo DescriptionNo DescriptionNo Description