Analysis of Differences in Service Quality in Social Security Administrator Patients and General Patients on Patient Satisfaction

(Study at Health Center Alasa, North Nias, Indonesia)

  • Jovani Christian Susanti Tobing Master of Public Health, Universitas Prima Indonesia, Indonesia
  • Ermi Girsang Master of Public Health, Universitas Prima Indonesia, Indonesia
  • Sri Lestari Ramadhani Nasution Master of Public Health, Universitas Prima Indonesia, Indonesia
Keywords: Patient Perception; Service Quality

Abstract

This research was conducted at the Health Center Alasa, North Nias Regency. The purpose of this study was to analyze the differences in perceptions of service quality between Social Security Administrator patients and general patients at the Health Center Alasa, North Nias Regency. This type of research is quantitative with a cross sectional approach. The population of this study was the average patient visit in the last three months, namely October -December 2022 as many as 135 patients. The sample size was l00 patients consisting of 50 Social Security Administrator patients and 50 general patients. The results showed that Social Security Administrator patients had a perception of good service quality as many as 18 respondents (18%) and not good as many as 32 respondents (64%). While general patients have a perception of good service quality as many as 24 respondents (52%) and unfavorable service as many as 26 respondents (52%). The results of statistical tests using the Independent T-test test obtained a significance value (p value) of 0.042 <0.05, this means that there are differences in perceptions of the quality of service of Social Security Administrator patients and general patients at the Health Center Alasa, North Nias Regency

Published
2023-07-06
How to Cite
Tobing, J., Girsang, E., & Nasution, S. L. R. (2023). Analysis of Differences in Service Quality in Social Security Administrator Patients and General Patients on Patient Satisfaction. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review, 6(7), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.47814/ijssrr.v6i7.1256