Factors determining the choice of a health centre for surgical treatment

Authors

  • Celina Łepecka-Klusek Chair and Department of Gynaecology and Gynaecological Endocrinology, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Artur Wdowiak Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Obstetric-Gynaecological Nursing, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Anna B. Pilewska-Kozak Chair and Department of Gynaecology and Gynaecological Endocrinology, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Kinga Syty Chair and Department of Gynaecology and Gynaecological Endocrinology, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Justyna Barlik Faculty of Nursing and Health Science, Medical University of Lublin Author
  • Grzegorz Jakiel I Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, MCPE in Warsaw Author

Keywords:

gynaecological surgery, choice of hospital

Abstract

Objective. The purpose of the study was to establish the factors determining the choice of a health centre for gynaecological surgical treatment.

Material and methods. The survey covered 272 women admitted to one of four hospitals for elective gynaecological surgery during 2 months of 2008. The questionnaire used was designed for the study undertaken and tested with a pilot study carried out in the group of 25 women.

Results. Regular gynaecological check-ups were confirmed by 160 (58.8%) respondents, including 44 (16.2%) - every 6 months, 75 (27.6%) – every year and 41 (15.0%) - every 2 years. The remaining 112 (41.2%) women stated they went for appointments once alarming symptoms occurred. The causes for gynaecological surgeries were divided into two groups. Group 1 included impaired function of the reproductive organ resulting in deteriorated quality of life (n=149; 54.8%), e.g. bleeding of various intensity, pain, displacement and altered stability of the reproductive organs, incontinence and procreative difficulties whereas group 2 – neoplastic diseases, e.g. malignant tumours (invading via the lymphatic system) and benign or marginal borderline tumours (n=123; 45.2%).

Conclusions. The criteria of choosing a hospital providing gynaecological surgery are determined by opinions heard, e.g. high qualifications of the medical staff, modern procedures applied, equipment and/or high standard of nursing care. The main criterion of choice is significantly correlated with the place of residence, marital status and education.

References

1. Ustawa z dnia 23 stycznia 2003 roku o powszechnym ubezpieczeniu w Narodowym Funduszu Zdrowia – Dz.U. Nr 45, poz. 391.

2. Bojar I, Wdowiak L, Ostrowski T, Kot K, Miotła P. Wpływ promocji zakładów opieki zdrowotnej na wybór miejsca leczenia. Zdr Publ. 2004;114(4):495-7.

3. Wroński K, Cywiński J, Bocian R. Jakość usług medycznych. Gin Prakt. 2008;16(2):42-5.

4. Wroński K, Cywiński J, Okraszewski J, Bocian R. Autonomia pacjenta w opiece zdrowotnej. Gin Prakt. 2008;16(1):22-6.

5. Stanisz A. Przystępny kurs statystyki w oparciu o program STATISTICA PL na przykładach z medycyny. Kraków: StatSoft, Polska, t. I; 2001.

6. Rudawska I. Prorynkowa orientacja jednostek opieki zdrowotnej – jej wyznaczniki, bariery i perspektywy adaptacji na polskim rynku usług medycznych. Przegl Org. 2001;10:37-40.

7. Kodeks Etyki Lekarskiej. Warszawa: Naczelna Izba Lekarska; 2004.

8. Ustawa o zawodzie lekarza. Dz.U. Nr 28, poz. 152 z poźn. zm. z dnia 5 grudnia 1996 r.

9. Armstrong BK, Gillespie JA, Leeder SR, et al. Challenges in health and health care for Australia. Med J Aust. 2007;187(9):485-9.

10. Ballem P. Guaranteeing accountability for quality care. Health Pap. 2007;7(4):61-5.

11. Breckenkamp J, Wiskow C, Laaser U. Progress on quality management in the German health system – a long and winding road. Health Res Policy Syst. 2007;5(5):7.

12. Eckert H, Resch KL. Quality management – quo vadis? Perspectives for quality management in hospitals. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2003;97(3):219-26.

13. Gvozdanović D, Koncar M, Kojundzić V, Jezidzić H. National Healthcare information system in Croatian primary care: the foundation for improvement of quality and effi ciency in patient care. Inform Prim Care. 2007;15(3):181-5.

14. Huber E. Health care reform as a development of the health care system. Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2007;101(6):397-406.

15. Wodchis WP, Teare GF, Anderson GM. Cost and quality: evidence from Ontario long term care hospitals. Med Care. 2007;45(10):981-8.

16. Selbmann HK. Assessment and certifi cation of hospital care in Germany. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2004;47(2):103-10.

17. Jabłoński A, Surówka J, Typel D. Psychologiczne aspekty leczenia operacyjnego. Ginekol Pol. 1998;69(1):342-4.

18. Łepecka-Klusek C, Pilewska-Kozak A, Syty K, Tkaczuk-Włach J, Szmigielska A, Jakiel G. Oczekiwanie na planowaną operację ginekologiczną w ocenie kobiet. Ginekol Pol. 2009;80(9):699-703.

19. Pilewska A, Jakiel G. Zapotrzebowanie na wsparcie o okresie okołooperacyjnym. Ann UMCS Sectio D Medicina. 2004;57 Suppl:246-9.

20. Pilewska A, Jakiel G. Oczekiwanie na interwencję chirurgiczną jako sytuacja trudna dla kobiet. Przegl Menopauz. 2005;9(5):37-41.

Downloads

Published

2009-12-01

Issue

Vol. 119 No. 4 (2009): Zdrowie Publiczne

Section

Artykuły