A multi-dimensional client satisfaction instrument.

B A Tanner

doi:10.1016/0149-7189(82)90023-4

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10259959

A multi-dimensional client satisfaction instrument.

B A Tanner

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Development of a client satisfaction measure through successive factor analyses is described. Five factors, each defined by five items and accounting for at least 11% of the total variance, were identified and replicated. A single second order factor also emerged in both studies. Reliability of the second order factor, and of three of the first order factors is sufficient for most purposes. The second order factor, which is a linear combination of the first order factors, was not significantly correlated with sex, age, race, or number of attempts made before receiving a client response. The distribution of scores was highly skewed, with most respondents scoring near the upper (satisfied) end.

Explore related subjects

Community Mental Health Services Consumer Behavior Evaluation Studies as Topic Factor Analysis, Statistical Indiana Michigan Surveys and Questionnaires Journal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

B A Tanner. 1982. A multi-dimensional client satisfaction instrument.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189(82)90023-4

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2003

Interventions and outcomes of health and social care service provision for people with severe mental illness in England.

BACKGROUND: Mental health policy in England is undergoing radical change involving the integration of services aimed at improving outcomes for patients. At the same time, there is limited evidence about how conventional services are performing. The present paper reports data on the services provided and short-term outcomes achieved in eight community services in England. METHOD: A survey of caseloads of nurses and social workers was undertaken using a single-page assessment tool (MARC1) (n = 3024). After 5 months a random sample of psychotic cases was followed up (n = 393). RESULTS: A tendency was observed for health and social care practitioners to use the services available from within their own organisation. Over time, in the most severe cases, there was a substantial increase in provision of the services of the other organisation. Outcomes in terms of changes in HoNOS, GAS and MARC1 scores were similar for both professional groups, and both reported similar amounts of met and unmet need (and in the same categories) at follow-up. CONCLUSION: The most likely explanation for the change in service provision is the separate operation of different professional groups acting as gatekeepers for their own resources.

Community Mental Health Services↗

PubMed2003

Models of mental health nurse-general practitioner liaison: promoting continuity of care.

UNLABELLED: AIM AND RATIONALE: Community mental health nurses and general practitioners share a pivotal role in the provision of mental health care in the community. The focus of this study was to identify models of general practitioner collaboration used by these nurses, and analyse the implications of these models for promoting continuity of care. The study was derived from a larger study of how community mental health nurses promote wellness with clients who are experiencing an early episode of psychotic illness. METHODS: This qualitative study used interviews and observation to collect data. The study took place in 1999 in regional and rural New South Wales, Australia and involved community mental health nurses. FINDINGS: The findings show that two models of nurse and general practitioner (GP) collaboration emerged from the data: Shared Care and Specialist Liaison. In the Shared Care model, nurses maintain close contact with GPs throughout the episode of acute care. In the Specialist Liaison model, the community mental health team assumes overall responsibility for care and treatment throughout the acute episode of illness. Contact with GPs throughout the episode of care by the community mental health team is, at best, intermittent. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that the Shared Care model is more consistent with supporting personal and organizational continuity of care, whereas the Specialist Liaison model is limited to encouraging personal continuity of care but further study is needed.

Community Mental Health Services↗

PubMed2003

Development of a group model of clinical supervision to meet the needs of a community mental health nursing team.

Clinical supervision is an important tool in the development of quality nursing care. It involves a process of reflection upon practice, the aim of which is to improve clinical practices and hence improve patient outcomes. The term 'clinical supervision' is itself problematic in that it implies an hierarchical, rather than a nurse-centred and reflective, process. In addition there are a variety of models of supervision which range from the purely managerial to the clinical. This gives rise to confusion and in some cases suspicion, in clinicians. This paper reports on the development, implementation and evaluation of a group model of clinical supervision developed by a small team of mental health nurses in a community mental health setting. This team recognised the need for a formal clinical supervision model but was unsure as to the model which best suited their practice situation and needs. Through collaboration with a university department of nursing, this group developed its own model of group clinical supervision. This paper reports on the development of the model and its evaluation. The model was developed with a small team of community nurses and hence may not be applicable to other teams and other settings. However, the methods described may be useful as a guide to other nurses who wish to plan, implement and evaluate a model of clinical supervision in their workplace.

Community Mental Health Services↗