Cargando…

Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept

BACKGROUND: The concept of responsiveness was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address non-clinical aspects of service quality in an internationally comparable way. Responsiveness is defined as aspects of the way individuals are treated and the environment in which they are treat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van der Kooy, Jacoba, Birnie, Erwin, Valentine, Nicole B., de Graaf, Johanna P., Denktas, Semiha, Steegers, Eric A. P., Bonsel, Gouke J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5622418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28962611
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1464-8
_version_ 1783267903176441856
author van der Kooy, Jacoba
Birnie, Erwin
Valentine, Nicole B.
de Graaf, Johanna P.
Denktas, Semiha
Steegers, Eric A. P.
Bonsel, Gouke J.
author_facet van der Kooy, Jacoba
Birnie, Erwin
Valentine, Nicole B.
de Graaf, Johanna P.
Denktas, Semiha
Steegers, Eric A. P.
Bonsel, Gouke J.
author_sort van der Kooy, Jacoba
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The concept of responsiveness was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address non-clinical aspects of service quality in an internationally comparable way. Responsiveness is defined as aspects of the way individuals are treated and the environment in which they are treated during health system interactions. The aim of this study is to assess responsiveness outcomes, their importance and factors influencing responsiveness outcomes during the antenatal and delivery phases of perinatal care. METHOD: The Responsiveness in Perinatal and Obstetric Health Care Questionnaire was developed in 2009/10 based on the eight-domain WHO concept and the World Health Survey questionnaire. After ethical approval, a total of 171 women, who were 2 weeks postpartum, were recruited from three primary care midwifery practices in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, using face-to-face interviews. We dichotomized the original five ordinal response categories for responsiveness attainment as ‘poor’ and good responsiveness and analyzed the ranking of the domain performance and importance according to frequency scores. We used a series of independent variables related to health services and users’ personal background characteristics in multiple logistic regression analyses to explain responsiveness. RESULTS: Poor responsiveness outcomes ranged from 5.9% to 31.7% for the antenatal phase and from 9.7% to 27.1% for the delivery phase. Overall for both phases, ‘respect for persons’ (Autonomy, Dignity, Communication and Confidentiality) domains performed better and were judged to be more important than ‘client orientation’ domains (Choice and Continuity, Prompt Attention, Quality of Basic Amenities, Social Consideration). On the whole, responsiveness was explained more by health-care and health related issues than personal characteristics. CONCLUSION: To improve responsiveness outcomes caregivers should focus on domains in the category ‘client orientation’. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-017-1464-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5622418
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56224182017-10-11 Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept van der Kooy, Jacoba Birnie, Erwin Valentine, Nicole B. de Graaf, Johanna P. Denktas, Semiha Steegers, Eric A. P. Bonsel, Gouke J. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research Article BACKGROUND: The concept of responsiveness was introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) to address non-clinical aspects of service quality in an internationally comparable way. Responsiveness is defined as aspects of the way individuals are treated and the environment in which they are treated during health system interactions. The aim of this study is to assess responsiveness outcomes, their importance and factors influencing responsiveness outcomes during the antenatal and delivery phases of perinatal care. METHOD: The Responsiveness in Perinatal and Obstetric Health Care Questionnaire was developed in 2009/10 based on the eight-domain WHO concept and the World Health Survey questionnaire. After ethical approval, a total of 171 women, who were 2 weeks postpartum, were recruited from three primary care midwifery practices in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, using face-to-face interviews. We dichotomized the original five ordinal response categories for responsiveness attainment as ‘poor’ and good responsiveness and analyzed the ranking of the domain performance and importance according to frequency scores. We used a series of independent variables related to health services and users’ personal background characteristics in multiple logistic regression analyses to explain responsiveness. RESULTS: Poor responsiveness outcomes ranged from 5.9% to 31.7% for the antenatal phase and from 9.7% to 27.1% for the delivery phase. Overall for both phases, ‘respect for persons’ (Autonomy, Dignity, Communication and Confidentiality) domains performed better and were judged to be more important than ‘client orientation’ domains (Choice and Continuity, Prompt Attention, Quality of Basic Amenities, Social Consideration). On the whole, responsiveness was explained more by health-care and health related issues than personal characteristics. CONCLUSION: To improve responsiveness outcomes caregivers should focus on domains in the category ‘client orientation’. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-017-1464-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-09-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5622418/ /pubmed/28962611 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1464-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
van der Kooy, Jacoba
Birnie, Erwin
Valentine, Nicole B.
de Graaf, Johanna P.
Denktas, Semiha
Steegers, Eric A. P.
Bonsel, Gouke J.
Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept
title Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept
title_full Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept
title_fullStr Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept
title_full_unstemmed Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept
title_short Quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a Dutch study applies the World Health Organization’s responsiveness concept
title_sort quality of perinatal care services from the user’s perspective: a dutch study applies the world health organization’s responsiveness concept
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5622418/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28962611
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1464-8
work_keys_str_mv AT vanderkooyjacoba qualityofperinatalcareservicesfromtheusersperspectiveadutchstudyappliestheworldhealthorganizationsresponsivenessconcept
AT birnieerwin qualityofperinatalcareservicesfromtheusersperspectiveadutchstudyappliestheworldhealthorganizationsresponsivenessconcept
AT valentinenicoleb qualityofperinatalcareservicesfromtheusersperspectiveadutchstudyappliestheworldhealthorganizationsresponsivenessconcept
AT degraafjohannap qualityofperinatalcareservicesfromtheusersperspectiveadutchstudyappliestheworldhealthorganizationsresponsivenessconcept
AT denktassemiha qualityofperinatalcareservicesfromtheusersperspectiveadutchstudyappliestheworldhealthorganizationsresponsivenessconcept
AT steegersericap qualityofperinatalcareservicesfromtheusersperspectiveadutchstudyappliestheworldhealthorganizationsresponsivenessconcept
AT bonselgoukej qualityofperinatalcareservicesfromtheusersperspectiveadutchstudyappliestheworldhealthorganizationsresponsivenessconcept