Satisfaction of the rural population with the quality of medical care

The aim of the study. To evaluate satisfaction with the quality of medical care at the outpatient and inpatient stages on the example of the rural population of the Saratov region.

Material and methods. The study involved 102 respondents (34 people from each municipal district) of both sexes aged 20 to 70 years, the average age was 46.3 [22.1; 68.3]. The study was conducted using a voluntary patient questionnaire.

Results. Respondents are more satisfied with the medical care provided by round-the-clock hospitals and emergency medical teams in 47.1% and 43.1% of cases, respectively, and the least confident with polyclinics (on average, 35.2%). Half of the respondents attribute the decline in the quality of medical care at the outpatient and inpatient stages simultaneously to several factors (long waiting for a specialist consultation, lack of necessary medical equipment, the inattentive attitude of medical personnel to patients). The respondents react to the decrease in the quality of medical care in the following way: 9 (8.8%) of respondents wrote complaints about the medical worker to the chief doctor, 57 (55.9%) – expressed their dissatisfaction with the medical staff, trying to solve the problem at the initial stages of its appearance, 36 (35.3%) – did not show active actions.

Discussion. The low level of satisfaction of rural population with quality of medical care, primarily due to understaffing of medical personnel and inadequate funding of health institutions, lack of high-level professional experience young professionals, the subjective perception of patients respondents on how to provide medical assistance based on information obtained from Internet resources.

Conclusions. On average, 41.8% of patients are satisfied with the quality of medical care in the Saratov region. Recommendations offered for solving problems that cause a decrease in the quality of medical care in this area.

Contribution of the authors:

Blinova V.V. — collection of material, processing, writing, statistical processing, analysis (37%);

Bogdanova T.M. — collection of material, processing, writing, statistical processing, analysis (20%);

Vologina A.P. — collection of material, processing, writing, statistical processing, analysis (15%);

Semenova V.A. — collection of material, processing, writing, statistical processing, analysis (14%);

Zankin M.A. — collection of material, processing, writing, statistical processing, analysis (14%).

All co-authors — approval of the final version of the manuscript, responsibility for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments. The study had no sponsorship.

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.