Perceived Service Quality and User Satisfaction with Orthotic-Prosthetic Devices and Services Among Individual with Physical Disabilities
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.ijds.2023.010.02.15Keywords:
Orthotic-prosthetic services, User satisfaction, Healthcare quality, Continuous enhancement, IndonesiaAbstract
This research contributes to ongoing efforts to enhance healthcare service quality and improve the well-being of individuals with disabilities, particularly those with physical disabilities relying on orthotic-prosthetic care in their communities. Currently, there is limited evidence available to guide policy, funding decisions, and practitioners in Indonesia. Study participants included adult orthosis/prosthesis users and parents/guardians of children using these devices, all of whom sought services at the Jakarta I Ministry of Health Polytechnic educational clinic in January to June 2023. Subsequently, the socket fabrication, fitting, and evaluation process took place, utilizing purposive sampling for surveys encompassing demographics and the Modified Orthotic Prosthetic User Survey (OPUS) – Client Satisfaction with Devices and Services. 73% of patients reported satisfaction with high-quality Orthotic-Prosthetic devices, while 86% expressed satisfaction with excellent service. This highlights the effectiveness of the Modified Orthotic Prosthetic User Survey (OPUS) in assessing user satisfaction with prosthetic-orthotic devices and services, underscoring the need for ongoing tool refinement.
References
Andrysek, J. (2010). Lower-limb prosthetic technologies in the developing world: A review of literature from 1994–2010. Prosthetics and orthotics international, 34(4), 378-398.
Baghbanbashi, A., Farahmand, B., Azadinia, F., & Jalali, M. (2022). Evaluation of user’s satisfaction with orthotic and prosthetic devices and services in orthotics and prosthetics center of Iran university of medical sciences. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal, 5(1).
Bakhsh, H., Franchignoni, F., Bravini, E., Ferriero, G., Giordano, A., & Foti, C. (2014). Validation of the Arabic version of the client satisfaction with device module of the “orthotics and prosthetics users” survey. Annals of Saudi Medicine, 34(4), 320-327.
Bettoni, E., Ferriero, G., Bakhsh, H., Bravini, E., Massazza, G., & Franchignoni, F. (2016). A systematic review of questionnaires to assess patient satisfaction with limb orthoses. Prosthetics and orthotics international, 40(2), 158-169.
Borrenpohl, D., Kaluf, B., & Major, M. J. (2016). Survey of US practitioners on the validity of the medicare functional classification level system and utility of clinical outcome measures for aiding K-level assignment. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 97(7), 1053-1063.
Borg, J. (2011). Assistive technology, human rights and poverty in developing countries. Perspectives based on a study in Bangladesh (Vol. 2011, No. 12). Lund University.
Borg, J., Lindström, A., & Larsson, S. (2011). Assistive technology in developing countries: a review from the perspective of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Prosthetics and orthotics international, 35(1), 20-29.Bosmans, J., Geertzen, J., & Dijkstra, P. U. (2009). Consumer satisfaction with the services of prosthetics and orthotics facilities. Prosthetics and orthotics international, 33(1), 69-77.
Bravini, E., Franchignoni, F., Ferriero, G., Giordano, A., Bakhsh, H., Sartorio, F., & Vercelli, S. (2014). Validation of the Italian version of the client satisfaction with device module of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey. Disability and Health Journal, 7(4), 442-447.
Burger, H., Giordano, A., Mlakar, M., Albensi, C., Brezovar, D., & Franchignoni, F. (2019). Cross-cultural adaptation and Rasch validation of the Slovene version of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS) Client Satisfaction with Device (CSD) in upper-limb prosthesis users. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 62(3), 168-173.
Cetin, G. (2020). Experience vs quality: predicting satisfaction and loyalty in services. The Service Industries Journal, 40(15-16), 1167-1182.
Demirdel, S., Ulaş, K., Erol Çelik, S., Karahan, S., & Topuz, S. (2022). Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the satisfaction module of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 46(2), 170-174.
Frossard, L. (2021). Trends and opportunities in health economic evaluations of prosthetic care innovations. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal, 4(2, No. 9), 1-16.
Ghoseiri, K., & Bahramian, H. (2012). User satisfaction with orthotic and prosthetic devices and services of a single clinic. Disability and rehabilitation, 34(15), 1328-1332.
Hadadi, M., Ghoseiri, K., Fardipour, S., Kashani, R. V., Asadi, F., & Asghari, A. (2016). The Persian version of satisfaction assessment module of Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey. Disability and health journal, 9(1), 90-99.
Heinemann, A. W., Bode, R. K., & O'reilly, C. (2003). Development and measurement properties of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS): a comprehensive set of clinical outcome instruments. Prosthetics and orthotics international, 27(3), 191-206.
Jarl, G., Holmefur, M., & Hermansson, L. M. (2014). Test–retest reliability of the Swedish version of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey. Prosthetics and orthotics international, 38(1), 21-26.
Magnusson, L., & Ahlström, G. (2017). Patients’ satisfaction with lower-limb prosthetic and orthotic devices and service delivery in Sierra Leone and Malawi. BMC health services research, 17(1), 1-13.
Magnusson, L., Ahlström, G., Ramstrand, N., & Fransson, E. (2013). Malawian prosthetic and orthotic users' mobility and satisfaction with their lower limb assistive device. Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 45(4), 385-391.
Malovecká, I., Mináriková, D., & Foltán, V. (2015, September). Patient Satisfaction With Orthopedic And Prosthetic Medical Devices. In CBU International Conference Proceedings (Vol. 3, pp. 419-426).
Peaco, A., Halsne, E., & Hafner, B. J. (2011). Assessing satisfaction with orthotic devices and services: a systematic literature review. JPO: Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 23(2), 95-105
Peng, Y., Zhu, Q., Wang, B., & Ren, J. (2020). A cross-sectional study on interference control: age affects reactive control but not proactive control. PeerJ, 8, e8365.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Feryanda Utami, Argianto Argianto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
