Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to identify the service quality dimensions that play an important role in patient satisfaction in campus clinics in Delhi; assess student satisfaction with service; and suggests ways to improve areas of dissatisfaction. Design/methodology/approach – A questionnaire was distributed to students who had completed at least two consultations at the college clinic. Convenience sampling was used to approach respondents. The questionnaire uses modified SERVQUAL and other instruments, including original dimensions and those constructed through detailed discussions. Factor analyses, reliability tests and the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy were conducted. The final sample had a total of 445 respondents. Findings – After factor analysis, the authors found that the dimensions affecting patient satisfaction are: staff professionalism; clinic staff reliability; clinic accessibility and basic facilities; tangibles; cleanliness; awareness of the clinic/diseases and how clinic staff deals with emergencies. Most students were satisfied with the professionalism of the clinic staff. More than 70 percent of the respondents reported that the clinic staff paid good attention to them. The campus clinic was deemed reliable by more than 50 percent of respondents. The students found the clinic's location convenient, with more than 50 percent supporting its location. However, there was dissatisfaction among the students regarding the tangibles of the clinic, with more than 50 percent favoring upgrading. There was satisfaction among the respondents regarding the availability of the doctor after clinic hours, but contact details for the clinic staff were not easily accessible on campus. More than 60 percent of respondents were satisfied with the cleanliness of the campus clinic. More than 50 percent felt that the campus clinic was not equipped to deal with emergencies efficiently. At the same time, 90 percent of respondents reported the availability of referral facilities in case of emergencies. Originality/value – The authors believe that this is the first study conducted to assess patient satisfaction in the campus clinics of engineering institutes in Delhi region. This paper provides valuable information to college clinic administrators.
Objectives: The objectives of this study were to assess the efficacy of oral monotherapy (Terbinafine) as compared to combination of oral drugs (Terbinafine and fluconazole) in treatment of dermatophyte infections. Methods: Patients of clinically diagnosed, potassium hydroxide (KOH) confirmed dermatophyte infections (n=235), were recruited as per inclusion criteria and randomized into Group A (Tab. Terbinafine 6 mg/kg body weight daily) and Group B (Tab. Terbinafine 6 mg/kg daily+Tab Fluconazole 3 mg/kg twice per week) treatment for 2 weeks. Assessment was done in beginning, after week 1 and after week 2 using visual analog scale (VAS) and global physician assessment (GPA). At the end of 4 weeks, they were again called back to assess the residual disease activity. Results: VAS scoring at week 1 and week 2 showed a significant reduction of scores in both the groups as compared to basal score of 0 week. Inter-group comparison showed decrease in mean-VAS itch scores in Group B as compared to Group A. Week 1 reduction in the Group B was statistically significant (p<0.001). GPA reflected a gradual but significant improvement in GPA scores end of week 1 and week 2 in both groups. The improvement seemed robust in Group B reflecting the stronger clinical response. The inter-group comparison showed statistically significant improvement in Group B over Group A in both 1stweek (p<0.001) and 2nd week (p=0.021). Conclusion: Dermatophyte infections treated with either terbinafine alone or terbinafine and fluconazole combination is clinically effective. Combination therapy is better than single drug therapy in terms of treatment response.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.