Development of a Hospital-Stakeholder Collaboration Tool Using Mixed Methods to Assess Stakeholder Perspectives for Hospital Service Improvement.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Purwaningsih Purwaningsih, Nasronudin Nasronudin, Nyoman Anita Damayanti, Mahmudah Mahmudah, Sri Andarini, Bagus Qomarudin, Djazuly Chalidyanto, Slamet Riyadi Yuwono, Aby Nugrah Septanto, Hakim Zulkarnain
{"title":"Development of a Hospital-Stakeholder Collaboration Tool Using Mixed Methods to Assess Stakeholder Perspectives for Hospital Service Improvement.","authors":"Purwaningsih Purwaningsih, Nasronudin Nasronudin, Nyoman Anita Damayanti, Mahmudah Mahmudah, Sri Andarini, Bagus Qomarudin, Djazuly Chalidyanto, Slamet Riyadi Yuwono, Aby Nugrah Septanto, Hakim Zulkarnain","doi":"10.4314/ejhs.v33i6.18","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The purpose of this study was to develop the Hospital-Stakeholder Collaboration (HSC) Tool and Hospital Performance Factor (HPF) Tool to explore stakeholder perception and value for hospital service improvement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This exploratory mixed-method study involved three steps: initial tool development (Step 1), validity testing (Step 2), and module development (Step 3). In Step 1, qualitative data collection through literature reviews, focus group discussions, and interviews with hospital management experts led to the creation of the preliminary tools. Step 2 involved qualitative analysis by α 5-member expert panel, followed by quantitative analysis with 36 respondents for validity (Pearson correlation, α = 0.05) and reliability (Cronbach's Alpha, α = 0.6) tests. Step 3 encompassed the final module development.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The HSC tool contains 6 domains and the HPF tool contains 4 perspectives. The 6 HSC domains were: 1) stakeholder identification, 2) interactive dialogue, 3) commitment, 4) planning, 5) implementation, 6) change in action and behavior. The 4 HPF perspectives were: 1) stakeholder perspective, 2) financial perspective, 3) internal business process, and 4) staff and organizational capacity. The values of the HSC tool validity and reliability tests were around 0,0046 and around 0,995, respectively. Additionally, the values of the HPF tool validity and reliability tests were around 0,0062 and around 0,995, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study offers a practical tool for needs assessment for the improvement of service by analyzing direct feedback from hospital stakeholders and measuring hospital performance factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":12003,"journal":{"name":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences","volume":"33 6","pages":"1075-1086"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11111266/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4314/ejhs.v33i6.18","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study was to develop the Hospital-Stakeholder Collaboration (HSC) Tool and Hospital Performance Factor (HPF) Tool to explore stakeholder perception and value for hospital service improvement.

Methods: This exploratory mixed-method study involved three steps: initial tool development (Step 1), validity testing (Step 2), and module development (Step 3). In Step 1, qualitative data collection through literature reviews, focus group discussions, and interviews with hospital management experts led to the creation of the preliminary tools. Step 2 involved qualitative analysis by α 5-member expert panel, followed by quantitative analysis with 36 respondents for validity (Pearson correlation, α = 0.05) and reliability (Cronbach's Alpha, α = 0.6) tests. Step 3 encompassed the final module development.

Results: The HSC tool contains 6 domains and the HPF tool contains 4 perspectives. The 6 HSC domains were: 1) stakeholder identification, 2) interactive dialogue, 3) commitment, 4) planning, 5) implementation, 6) change in action and behavior. The 4 HPF perspectives were: 1) stakeholder perspective, 2) financial perspective, 3) internal business process, and 4) staff and organizational capacity. The values of the HSC tool validity and reliability tests were around 0,0046 and around 0,995, respectively. Additionally, the values of the HPF tool validity and reliability tests were around 0,0062 and around 0,995, respectively.

Conclusion: This study offers a practical tool for needs assessment for the improvement of service by analyzing direct feedback from hospital stakeholders and measuring hospital performance factors.

使用混合方法开发医院与利益相关者合作工具,以评估利益相关者对改善医院服务的看法。
背景:本研究的目的是开发医院-利益相关者合作(HSC)工具和医院绩效因素(HPF)工具:本研究的目的是开发医院利益相关者合作(HSC)工具和医院绩效因素(HPF)工具,以探讨利益相关者对医院服务改进的看法和价值:这项探索性混合方法研究包括三个步骤:初始工具开发(步骤 1)、有效性测试(步骤 2)和模块开发(步骤 3)。在步骤 1 中,通过文献综述、焦点小组讨论和与医院管理专家的访谈收集定性数据,从而开发出初步工具。第 2 步是由α 5 人专家小组进行定性分析,然后对 36 名受访者进行定量分析,以检验有效性(Pearson 相关性,α = 0.05)和可靠性(Cronbach's Alpha,α = 0.6)。步骤 3 包括最后的模块开发:结果:HSC 工具包含 6 个领域,HPF 工具包含 4 个视角。6 个 HSC 领域是1) 利益相关者识别,2) 互动对话,3) 承诺,4) 规划,5) 实施,6) 行动和行为改变。4 个 HPF 视角是1) 利益相关者视角,2) 财务视角,3) 内部业务流程,4) 员工和组织能力。HSC 工具的有效性和可靠性测试值分别为 0,0046 和 0,995 左右。此外,HPF 工具的有效性和可靠性测试值分别为 0,0062 和 0,995 左右:本研究通过分析医院利益相关者的直接反馈和测量医院绩效因素,为改善服务的需求评估提供了一个实用工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences
Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
8.30%
发文量
137
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ethiopian Journal of Health Sciences is a general health science journal addressing clinical medicine, public health and biomedical sciences. Rarely, it covers veterinary medicine
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信