A Study on the Quality of Healthcare Services for Four Critical Illnesses and the Maintenance of Right to Protection and Dignity in a Senior General Hospital

Purpose: The unique nature of life-and-death healthcare services sets them apart from other service industries. While many studies exist on the relationship between healthcare services and customer satisfaction, most of them focus on mildly ill patients, ignoring the differences between critically ill and non-seriously ill patients. This study discusses the actual quality of healthcare services for patients who are facing life-threatening illnesses and are on life support, as well as their right to protection and dignity.Methods: The survey conducted to 149 patients with the four major illnesses: cancer, heart disease, brain disease and rare and incurable disease, those who have experiences with senior general hospitals.Results: The basic statistics of this study are adequate to represent the four major critical illnesses, and the reliability and validity of this study's hypotheses, which were measured by multiple items, were analyzed, and the internal consistency was judged to be high. In addition, it was found that the convergent validity was good and the discriminant validity was also secured. When examining the goodness of fit of the hypotheses, the SRMR, which is the standardized root mean square of residuals that measures the difference between the covariance matrix of the data variables and the theoretical covariance matrix structure of the model, met the optimal criteria.Conclusion: The academic implications of this study are differentiated from other studies by moving away from evaluating the quality of healthcare services for mildly ill patients and focusing on the rights and dignity of patients with life-threatening illnesses in four senior general hospitals. In terms of academic implications, this study enriches the depth of related studies by demonstrating the right to protection and dignity as a factor of patient-centeredness based on physical environment quality, interaction quality, and outcome quality, which are presented as sub-factors of healthcare quality. We found that the three quality factors classified by Brady and Cronin (2001) are optimized for healthcare quality assessment and management, and that the results of patients' interaction quality assessment can be used to provide a comprehensive quality rating for hospitals. Health and human rights are inextricably linked, so assessing the degree to which rights and dignity are protected can be a superior and more comprehensive measurement tool than traditional health level measures for healthcare organizations. Practical implications: Improving the quality of the physical environment and the quality of outcomes is an important challenge for hospital managers who attract patients with life and death conditions, but given the scale and economics of time, money, and human inputs, improving the quality of interactions and defining them as performance indicators in hospital quality management is an efficient way to create maximum value in the short term.