An Assessment of Patient Satisfaction With Home Care Services in an Eastern City of Turkey.
Ezgi Yarasir, Irem Bulut
PMID 40331598WHAT IT FOUND
Most patients receiving free Turkish home care rated the service satisfactory, and experience scores were near the top of the scale.
Satisfaction was lower when waiting time to start service increased.
Key findings
0192.8% of participants said the home care service was successful and satisfactory, and the mean patient experience score was 4.7.
02Satisfaction scores did not differ by gender, age or marital status, but were higher among participants with at least high school education, larger families, higher income, poor self-rated health, neurological disease, and those whose caregiver did not work outside caregiving.
03Longer waits to first examination and to start of service were associated with lower satisfaction.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study was done in one province in Turkey, so it may not apply to other home care systems or cultures. It measured patient-reported satisfaction at one time point, not clinical outcomes, service quality audits, or care received over time. No comparison group or intervention was tested, so associations cannot show cause. The authors did not use mixed methods, so they did not explore why people were satisfied or dissatisfied in depth. People with cognitive disability that prevented survey response were excluded, so it may not capture the experience of patients who cannot self-report. The sample reached fewer participants than planned.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest and reported nothing to disclose.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat the high satisfaction rate as evidence that home care improves clinical outcomes or that nurse-delivered visits caused the satisfaction. It was a single-province cross-sectional survey of patient-reported experience, with no comparison group and no clinical outcome measures.