VALIDATION OF A SERVICE PERFORMANCE SCALE IN A TOXICOLOGY CENTER FROM CHILE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31052/1853.1180.v21.n3.17702Keywords:
Administration, Patient´s Satisfaction, Quality of ServiceAbstract
Objective: To assess construct validity and SERVPERF scale reliability in users requiring information by phone at the Toxicology Information Center of the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile (CITUC, Spanish acronym).Methodology: Instrument validation study for telephone service. The sample was made up of 180 users who required telephone information in a three-month period. Internal consistency of the instrument was determined using Cronbach´s alpha (?). Construct validity was assessed by exploratory factor analysis. Results: Factor analysis yield a 6-factor structure and showed that some items tend to blend among dimensions. When determining reliability for the dimensions we obtained: reliability, ?= 0.678; responsibility, ?=0.852; assurance, ?=0.878 and empathy, ?=0.887. Service provided by CITUC professionals was given the maximum score when assessed by users. Conclusions: SERVPERF scale gets adequate reliability levels; thus, the instrument has consistency and stability. Further analysis of construct validity would be interesting since empirical evidence is not consistent with theoretical evidence.
Downloads
References
1. Superintendencia de Salud. Satisfacción y Calidad Percibida en la Atención de Salud Hospitalaria: Ranking de Prestadores, Informe Global [Internet]. 2013. Disponible en: http://www.supersalud.gob.cl/documentacion/569/articles-9005_recurso_1.pdf
2. Senić V, Marinković V. Patient care, satisfaction and service quality in health care. International Journal Of Consumer Studies [serial on the Internet]. (2013, May), [cited February 25, 2016]; 37(3): 312-319. Available from: Business Source Complete
3. Gallardo A, Reynaldos K. Calidad de servicio: satisfacción usuaria desde la perspectiva de enfermería. Enfermería Global 2014; 3(36): 353-363.
4. Arenas Y, Fuentes V, Campos C. Grado de satisfacción usuaria de la consulta EPAS-RN del Servicio de Pediatría del CEDIUC. EPAS 1993;10(1):15-17.
5. Guzmán del Río E. Satisfacción del usuario. EPAS 1986;11:6-11.
6. Donabedian, A. The Definition of Quality and Approaches to Its Assessment, Volume I: Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Health Administration Press, 1980.
7. Riveros J, Berné C. La aplicación del marketing en hospitales públicos desde la perspectiva de los funcionarios: El caso de un hospital del sur de Chile. Rev Med Chile 2006;134(3):353-360.
8. Caminal J. La medida de la satisfacción: un instrumento de participación de la población en la mejora de la calidad de los servicios sanitarios. Rev Cal Asist 2001;16:276-9.
9. Patterson M, Rick J, Wood S, Carroll C, Balain S, Booth A. Systematic review of the links between human resource management practices and performance. Health Technol Assess. 2010 Oct;14(51):1-334, iv.
10. Jha A, Orav E, Zheng J, Epstein A. Patients’ perception of hospital care in the United States. N Engl J Med 2008 Oct;359:1921-1931
11. MINSAL [Internet]. Chile: Ministerio de Salud, Gobierno de Chile. Estrategia Nacional de Salud, para el cumplimiento de los Objetivos Sanitarios de la Década 2011-2020 Available from: http://web.minsal.cl/portal/url/item/c4034eddbc96ca6de0400101640159b8.pdf
12. Armahizer M, Johnson D, Deusenberry C, Foley J, Krenzelok E, Pummer T. Evaluation of Pharmacist Utilization of a Poison Center as a Resource for Patient
Care. Journal Of Pharmacy Practice [serial on the Internet]. (2013, June), [cited February 24, 2016]; 26(3): 220-227 8p.
13. Ghaibi S, Ipema H, Gabay M. ASHP Guidelines on the Pharmacist›s Role in Providing Drug Information. American Journal Of Health-System Pharmacy [serial on the Internet]. (2015, Apr), [cited February 25, 2016]; 72(7): 573-577 5p. Available from: CINAHL Complete
14. Pena Mileide Morais, Silva Edenise Maria Santos da, Tronchin Daisy Maria Rizatto, Melleiro Marta Maria. The use of the quality model of Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry in health services. Rev. esc. enferm. USP [Internet]. 2013 Oct [cited 2016 Feb 25] ; 47( 5 ): 1227-1232. Available from: http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0080-62342013000501227&lng=en. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0080-623420130000500030.
15. Valandia F, Ardón N, Jara M, Cárdenas J, Pérez N. Oportunidad, satisfacción y razones de no uso de los servicios de salud de Colombia. Rev Sal Pub 2004;5(1):46-58.
16. Churi S, Abraham L, Ramesh M, Narahari M. Evaluation of poison information services provided by a new poison information center. Indian J Pharmacol. 2013 Sep-Oct; 45(5): 496–501.
17. Fernandez MC, Villarreal CL. Poison Center Data: Complete or Completely Inaccurate? How to Improve Accuracy in Data Recording. Abstracts of the 2010 International
18. Sam K, Rajan M, Saghir Z, Kumar P, Rao P. Evaluation of poison information services of a clinical pharmacy department in a south indian tertiary care hospital. J Clin Diagn Res 2009 feb;3:1313-1318.
19. Wensing M, Grol R, Asberg J, Montfort P, Weel C, Felling A. Does the health status of chronically ill patients predict their judgements of the quality of general practice care?. Qual Life Res 1997;6:293-299
20. Subsecretaría de Telecomunicaciones [Internet]. Estadísticas Telefonía. 2017 [cited July 24, 2017] Disonible en: http://www.subtel.gob.cl/estudios-y-estadisticas/telefonia/
21. Fricker S, Galesic M, Tourangeau R, Yan T. An experimental comparison of web and telephone surveys. Public Opin Q 2005;69(3):370-392.
22. Cronin J, Taylor S. Measuring Service Quality: A Re-examination and Extension. Journal of Marketing 1992 Jul;56(3):55-68.
23. Jabnoun N, Al-Tamimi H. Measuring perceived Service quality at UEA comercial Banks. IJQRM 2003;20(4):458-472.
24. Ting D. Service quality and satisfaction perceptions: curvilinear and interaction effect. IJBM 2004;22(6):402-407.
25. Sharma A, Mehta V. Service quality perceptions in financial servies-a case study of banking services. J Serv Res 2004 Oct;4(2):205-223.
26. Bauer H, Hammerschmidt M, Falk T. Measuring the Quality of e-banking portals. IJBM 2005;23(2):153-175.
27. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, Pennifer E. Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: Report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value Health 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104
28. Waksberg J. Sampling Methods for Random Digit Dialing. JASA 1978;73:40-46.
29. Cea M. Métodos de encuesta: teoría y práctica, errores y mejora. Madrid: SINTESIS; 2014.
30. George D, Mallery P. SPSS/PC+ step by step: A simple guide and reference. Belmont, USA: Wadsworth Publishing Company; 1995.
31. Campo-Arias A, Oviedo H. Propiedades psicométricas de una escala: la consistencia interna. Rev. Sal Pub 2008; 10(2):831-9.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2017 Escuela de Salud Pública y Ambiente. Facultad de Ciencias Médicas. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License which allows the work to be copied, distributed, exhibited and interpreted as long as it is not done for commercial purposes.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication process. (See The Effect of Open Access). (See The Effect of Open Access).
How to Cite
