Page 1

Group #:

Topic:
Group Members:

Page 2

Introduction:

Topic: Patients' Hospital Experience: A Correlational Study

1. Describe the profile of the respondents in terms of

1.1. Gender
1.2. Room accommodation
2. Determine the respondents' hospital experience in terms of
2.1 facilities
2.2 staff
2.3 services

3. Compare the hospital experience of the respondents when grouped according to

3.1 gender
3.2. room accommodation
4. Determine the degree of relationship among the factors that determine the hospital
experience of the respondents.

Results and Discussion:

1. Describe the profile of the respondents in terms of

1.1. Gender
1.2. Room accommodation

Table 1: Respondents' Profile According to Gender

Gender frequency Re.l. freq.

Female 34 77%
Male 10 23%
Total 44 100%
Table 1 shows that 34 out of 44 respondents were females comprising 77% of
the sample size considered in this study, while 23% or 10 were males.
 Table 2: Respondents' Profile According to Hospital Accommodation

Hospital Accomodation frequency Rel. freq.

Gen. Adm. 8 18%
Private 20 45%
Semi-Private 13 30%
Suite 3 7%
Total 44 100%
Table 2 reveals that 45% of the respondents were admitted in hospital private
rooms, while 30% spent their confinement in semi-private rooms and18% or 8 out of 44
were housed in the General Admission rooms. Although there were some who had
enjoyed the luxury of hotel-like services in suite rooms but they were very few, only 3 out
of 44 or barely 7% of the respondents.

2. Determine the respondents' hospital experience in terms of

2.1 facilities
2.2 staff
2.3 services

Table 3: Respondents' Experience in terms of Facilities

Facilities Mean s V.I.

Admission 3.55 0.93 s
Room Acc 4.20 0.90 vs
Laboratory 3.86 0.98 s
ER 3.84 0.99 s
OR 4.61 0.49 vs
Table 3 presents the respondents’ level of satisfaction in terms of hospital facilities.
Generally, the respondents were satisfied with the hospital’s facilities as shown by the
mean rating ranging from 3.55 to 4.61 and the standard deviations showing the
respondents’ differing opinions. Among the facilities, however, the Operating Theatre
(OR) got the highest rating which implies that the respondents were very satisfied with
their experience in the OR and the standard deviation of 0.49 indicates homogeneity in
the respondents’ rating of this facility.
 Table 4: Respondents' Experience in terms of Hospital Staffs

Staffs Mean s V.I.

Concierge 4.34 0.48 V. S
Maintenance 4.27 0.79 V. S
Lab. Asst. 4.39 0.62 V. S
Nurses 4.61 0.49 V. S
According to table 4, the respondents were also very satisfied with the hospital
staff which implies that the staff of the given departments were able to meet, if not
exceed, their expectations. Except for the Maintenance department, the standard
deviations for the rest of the staff indicate a similarity in the respondents’ opinions.

Table 5: Respondents' Experience in terms of Hospital Services

Services Mean s V.I.

Parking 4.34 0.53 V.S.
Pharmacy 4.30 0.82 V.S.
Dietary 4.32 0.71 V.S.
Nursing 4.61 0.54 V.S.
In table 5, the nursing services got the highest rating of 4.61 while the other
services like the parking, pharmacy, and dietary have very close ratings ranging from 4.30
to 4.34, meaning, the respondents were very satisfied to each of the hospital services.
This implies that the hospital is committed to providing quality services to their customers.
The standard deviations on the other hand, reveal the respondents’ varying opinions.

3. Compare the hospital experience of the respondents when grouped according to

3.1 gender
3.2. room accommodation

Table 6: Comparing respondents' Hospital Experience According to Gender

Variables Mean std. dev. t-value p-value t-critical V.I.

Female 4.27 0.336 -0.002 0.998 2.179 not sig.
Male 4.27 0.485
 Table 6 shows that there is no significant difference in the respondents’ hospital
experience when grouped according to gender as shown by the t-value of -0.002 which
is less than the t-critical value of 2.18. It implies that both the male and female
respondents have the same hospital experiences.

Table 7: Comparing Respondents' Hospital Experience According to Room

Accommodation

ANOVA
Source of Variation SS df MS F P-value F crit VI
Between Groups 0.346041 3 0.115347 0.838937 0.480583 2.838745 not sig.
Within Groups 5.499666 40 0.137492

Total 5.845707 43

Table 7 presents the respondents’ hospital experience according to room

accommodation. The p-value of 0.48 which is greater than the alpha of .05 likewise
indicates that there is no significant difference on the respondents’ hospital experience
when grouped according to room accommodation. It implies that patients admitted in
the General admission have the same hospital experience as those in the semi-private,
private, and suite rooms.

4. Determine the degree of relationship among the factors that determine the hospital
experience of the respondents.

Table 8: Relationship of the Factors Affecting the Respondents' Hospital

Experience

Factors Facilities Staff Services

Facilities r-value 1
V.I
Staff r-value 0.519495215 1
V.I moderate positive
Services r-value 0.409027849 0.890934 1
V.I low positive strong positive

The computed correlation coefficients in table 8 ranging from 0.41 to 0.89 indicate
a low to a high relationship among the variables. This finding simply implies that efficient
staff provides efficient services and vice versa.

Conclusions: