Search

Objective: To design and validate a scale (CSR-Hospital-SP) to determine health professionals' views on the approach of management to corporate social responsibility (CSR) in their hospital., Methods: The literature was reviewed to identify the main CSR scales and select the dimensions to be evaluated. The initial version of the scale consisted of 25 items. A convenience sample of a minimum of 224 health professionals working in five public hospitals in five autonomous regions were invited to respond. Floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency, reliability, and construct validity were analyzed., Results: A total of 233 health professionals responded. The CSR-Hospital-SP scale had 20 items grouped into four factors. The item-total correlation was higher than 0.30; all factor loadings were greater than 0.50; 59.57% of the variance was explained; Cronbach's alpha was 0.90; Spearman-Brown's coefficient was 0.82., Conclusion: The CSR-Hospital-SP scale is a tool designed for hospitals that implement accountability mechanisms and promote socially responsible management approaches., (Copyright © 2012 SESPAS. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To analyze hospital and primary care physicians' knowledge of certain patients' rights recently modified by Spanish Law 41/2002 (law of patient autonomy)., Material and Methods: We performed a voluntary survey of hospital and primary care physicians who were presented with three problem situations drawn from court decisions and the law of patient autonomy., Results: Among interviewed physicians, 78% were familiar with the law of patient autonomy. Fifty-three percent knew how to explain what advance wills are. Eighty-eight percent responded correctly to the problem situation concerning the right to privacy. Fifty-seven percent knew the legal age of consent for healthcare. Seventy percent correctly applied patients' right not to be informed. Only 38% responded correctly to all three problem situations. Correct responses were more frequent (odds ratio: 2.4-3.4) among physicians who were familiar with the law of patient autonomy., Conclusions: At least one out of every 10 physicians could be legally compromised by lack of knowledge of the law of patient autonomy. Patients' rights were most likely to be jeopardized in patients aged between 16 and 18 years old. Prior information on the law of patient autonomy contributes to greater compliance., (Copyright 2009 SESPAS. Published by Elsevier Espana. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To identify the best way to inform patients about centers and services so that they can make a responsible choice, and to identify which factors determine patients' decisions., Subjects and Methods: Data on three illnesses (breast cancer, benign prostatic hypertrophy, and cataracts) in three fictitious hospitals were shown to patients. The data were presented to 1,259 subjects through four different means: a brochure including a table, a brochure with a bar graph, three brochures with tables, and three brochures with bar graphs. Data on each of the hospitals included: professional profiles, medical and surgical outcomes, side effects, patients' and relatives' satisfaction, and hospital complaints. The subjects completed a questionnaire evaluating the information received., Results: Most patients (88%) preferred to receive full information and to share decision-making with their physician. Sixty-four percent of the patients chose the hospital with the best medical or surgical outcomes. Patients preferred the data presented through a brochure with a table (p < 0.001). Three factors were identified with severe illness (satisfaction, outcomes and complaints) and two factors with non-severe illness (satisfaction and outcomes). Men paid more attention to medical and surgical outcomes (p < 0.001), relapses (p < 0.001), and side effects (p < 0.001). When performing comparisons, health professionals paid greater attention to medical and surgical outcomes than to patients' and relatives' satisfaction (t range between 0.40 and 0.90, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Differences were found in the need for information and in comprehension depending on the way information was presented and on the type of disease. Gender and health knowledge seem to be predictors of patients' information needs when choosing a hospital.

Objective: To compare the opinions of patients assisted in 5 hospitals., Design: Descriptive study based in a survey by mail has been used in all cases., Instruments: The SERVQHOS questionnaire., Subjects: 930 patients. Answer rate around 35%., Results: 19% of the patients would not recommend the hospital. 59.2% was shown satisfied and 3.1% very unsatisfied. To know the doctor's and nurse's name were related to perceived quality. The frequency with which the patients said to have been correctly informed was not related to quality. Neither age nor patient's sex showed a relationship with perceived quality., Conclusion: The patients value the hospital positively although there are an important number of unsatisfied patients.