ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Ocular trauma is a distressing condition feared by the general public. AIM: To evaluate the construct validity and internal consistency of an instrument to measure the level of user satisfaction in patients treated at an Ocular Trauma and Ophthalmological Emergency Unit. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A survey to measure user satisfaction was applied to patients consulting at the Ocular Trauma Unit in a public hospital on April 2014. Internal consistency and construct validity from the estimated Cronbach alpha coefficient and factor analysis were assessed. RESULTS: Surveys answered by 138 patients aged 45 ± 15 years (93% men), were analyzed. The reliability obtained for the final questionnaire was 0.88. The factor analysis yielded four factors responsible for explaining 74.1% of the total variance, related to "quality of clinical information", "treatment by health care personnel", "lighting conditions, environment and noise" and "waiting time and overall assessment of service". CONCLUSIONS: These results allow to consider the instrument as a useful and reliable tool that can be applied to ophthalmological emergency service users in Chile.
Subject(s)
Emergency Medical Services , Emergency Service, Hospital , Ophthalmology , Patient Satisfaction , Surveys and Questionnaires , Chile , Cross-Sectional Studies , Factor Analysis, Statistical , Humans , Male , Quality of Health CareABSTRACT
Background: Ocular trauma is a distressing condition feared by the general public. Aim: To evaluate the construct validity and internal consistency of an instrument to measure the level of user satisfaction in patients treated at an Ocular Trauma and Ophthalmological Emergency Unit. Material and Methods: A survey to measure user satisfaction was applied to patients consulting at the Ocular Trauma Unit in a public hospital on April 2014. Internal consistency and construct validity from the estimated Cronbach alpha coefficient and factor analysis were assessed. Results: Surveys answered by 138 patients aged 45 ± 15 years (93% men), were analyzed. The reliability obtained for the final questionnaire was 0.88. The factor analysis yielded four factors responsible for explaining 74.1% of the total variance, related to quality of clinical information, treatment by health care personnel, lighting conditions, environment and noise and waiting time and overall assessment of service. Conclusions: These results allow to consider the instrument as a useful and reliable tool that can be applied to ophthalmological emergency service users in Chile.