Search results

The purpose of this paper is to assess patient satisfaction in Greek public hospitals.

In total, 367 patients participated in the study with a minimum of three days stay at the hospital. Measures included overall satisfaction, satisfaction with medical and nursing staff, satisfaction with room facilities, waiting times, extra costs. Information was also collected concerning sex, age, education, salary and length of stay in the hospital. Participants were also asked to indicate, in an open‐ended question, the most positive and the most negative aspects of their care.

Patients' bad experience with aspects of their care was not directly reflected in low levels of satisfaction. Patients had to wait long hours to get an appointment with a doctor or after their examination to be admitted to the hospital. Many patients had to rely on a personal nurse and to pay extra money to the medical and nursing staff. They considered lack of staff as the main drawback of the hospital. However, their overall satisfaction was very high.

These results raise concerns about how patients evaluate. Patients are expected to act as consumers who carefully evaluate the aspects of care they receive. However, the aspects of care which patients take for granted when they evaluate their experience with health care providers needs to be illustrated further. Patients' relationship with health care providers may reflect trust rather than rational choice.

This paper provides useful information on assessing patient satisfaction in Greek public hospitals which could be used elsewhere.

The purpose of the study is to identify and ascertain if there were any validated tools for diagnosing or screening autism spectrum disorder in adults with ID. The estimated prevalence of intellectual disability (ID) in the general population is about 10.37/1,000 population (Maulik et al., 2011). In total, 1 out of 4 individuals with ID suffers from an autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (Sappok et al., 2010). Early diagnosis and support for ASD is key to having a good quality of life. The diagnosis of ASD in people with an ID presents its own challenges and it is likely under-identification of ASD amongst adults with ID by about 20% to 30% (Emerson and Baines, 2010).

Studies were selected based on the following criteria: studies that reported either screening or diagnostic tools for ASD, participants had an ID i.e. a mean IQ of <70, adults i.e. participants were >18 years of age at the time of entry to the study and articles reported either sensitivity, specificity or area under the curve. Relevant studies that were published up to January 2020 were identified from EMBASE, PsychINFO, CINAHL and PubMed. In total, 75 papers were identified of which 15 papers met the criteria.

The screening or diagnostic tools currently in use is dependant on the degree of ID. A number of the tools had good psychometric properties and utility when used in people with specific degrees of ID or when used in combination with another screening or diagnostic tool. The authors could not identify a diagnostic tool that could be used across all levels of severity of ID unless used in combination. Hence, concluded that there is a need for a diagnostic tool with good psychometric properties for the assessment of ASD in adults with all degree of ID within a reasonable time period without the need for an additional tool to be used in conjunction.

Currently, the “gold standard” for diagnosing ASD is a lengthy and time-consuming process carried out by trained multi-disciplinary team members who assess historical, behavioural and parent/carer report to arrive at a diagnosis. There are a number of tools that have been developed to aid diagnosis. However, it is important to identify the tools that can optimise the procedures and are also time-efficient.