الفهرس 
AcknowledgmentsOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 198 |  |  |
| | | from | 198 | | |
Abstract
Summary br Through employing SERVQUAL, this cross sectional study evaluates the level of service quality of oncology and nuclear medicine health services in Sohag governorate -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; both the patients and physicians perspectives with a view to uncovering, primarily; the relationship between service quality dimensions and the patients’ satisfactions. This was in the period 2016 – 2019 by personal interviewing. br A sample of 550 patients of oncology department of Sohag University Hospital and Sohag Cancer Center participated in the questionnaire survey; 215 (39.1 %) -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; SUH and 335 (60.9 %) were -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; SCC. Also all physicians in the two mentioned places asked to participate. br Descriptive statistics, internal consistency, factor analysis and comparative statistical techniques and tests of significance were employed to investigate the relationship between service quality (SQ) dimensions, assess oncology and nuclear medicine service quality and also; patients’ satisfaction. br Results shows preponderance of female patients (60.5 %); inhabit Sohag governorates (90 %); especially rural areas (81.8%), (10 %) were have been in other governorates; Qena mostly. The patients were mostly married, -gt; 85 % in either hospitals; 67.3 % were in the most productive age groups 40-60 years. More than three fourths of our patients were illiterate, unable to work (-gt; 80 %) and had a very low income ( -gt; 90 %). br The most tremendously occurring cancer in the study was the breast cancer (29.6 %) followed by bladder cancer (9.3 %), lymphoma (9.1 %), colorectal (8.2 %) and lung cancers (6.7 %). br Most of oncology patients attended the oncology institutes (about 60 %) in -#111;-#114;-#100;-#101;-#114; to receive treatment firstly, and in about one fourth of the cases to follow up their next doses of therapy and follow up their illness conditions; otherwise they came for more than one purpose or even making sophisticated investigations. br Internal consistency of the SERVQUAL scale was validated by calculating the Cronbach`s alpha for the overall scale , for the perception scale , for the expectation scale and for every dimension included. As such, for the overall service quality scale, the Cronbach`s alpha had a value of 0.878. For the perception scale and the expectation scale, the Cronbach`s alpha values were 0.926 and 0.960 respectively. br Cronbach`s alphas for each dimension (tangibles, reliability, responsiveness, assurance and empathy) were all above 0.7. It was about 0.8 for tangibles, reliability and empathy and 0.9 for responsiveness, assurance and even the overall regarding expectation. For perception it was 0.7 for both tangibles and assurance dimensions, being 0.8 for reliability, responsiveness and empathy. It reached 0.9 as an overall value regarding perception. The alpha values found indicated that it is a sufficiently reliable measure of service quality. br For conducting factor analysis, the Kaiser- Meyer – Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy was used to measure the adequacy of the sample and the results indicated that the study sample was adequate and data set was considered to be highly desirable for factor analysis . The Bartlett’s test of sphericity was used to test the multivariate normality of the set of distributions. This result implied that the data were thus approximately multivariate normal and acceptable for factor analysis. br The results highlighted a three‐factor solution for the SERVQUAL tool i.e. three factors were extracted in the analysis using a standard eigenvalue of 1 br AS regard the gap analysis : there were no positive gaps, indicating that perceptions does not exceed expectations at all. The highest gap score occurred within assurance dimension followed by responsiveness dimension then came tangibility and reliability dimensions, while the lowest gap appear in empathy dimension. Using the paired samples t‐test, a comparison of each patient’s paired ratings on their expectations and perceptions of service quality statements indicated that the 15 attributes were all statistically significant. Significantly higher expectations than perceptions were found -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; all of the paired attributes br On the other hand, physician perspective showed that the majority of physicians’ answers lied within the accepted level between “very good and good” which mean that they were agreeing on most of aspects regarding private physician cooperation, medical expertise, staff accessibility time interval and informational value of supplied reports, outpatient consultation, outpatient and inpatient services, hospital staff friendliness, training, commendation and reputation but it wasn’t the case on the statement regard availability of bed quantity and capacity as there were (36.4%) of physician answer “faulty” on this statement . Also regular newsletter was “insufficient” in (59.1%) of physicians answers. br Resembling patient perspective, there were no positive gaps, indicating that perceptions did not exceed expectations. All gaps are negative, indicating that perceptions felt short of expectations. Unlike the patient, the most negative service gaps occurred within the tangibility dimension (as regard the physical facilities, up to date equipment and the appearance) and item 11 (employees are knowledgeable) in addition to item 13 (employees get adequate support -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; their employers to do their jobs well) within the assurance dimension. br Also significantly higher expectations than perceptions were found -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; all of the paired attributes except pair number eight which stated ” Patients receive prompt service -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; current hospital employees. - It is realistic for patients to expect prompt service -#102;-#114;-#111;-#109; cancer center employees.” there were no statistically significant difference between physician expectation and perception.