Patient satisfaction with health care providers in South Africa: The influences of race and socioeconomic status

56Citations
Citations of this article
202Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives. The first democratic government elected in South Africa in 1994 inherited huge inequalities in health status and health provision across all sections of the population. This study set out to assess, 4 years later, the influence of race and socioeconomic status (SES) on perceived quality of care from health care providers. Design. A 1998 countrywide survey of 3820 households assessed many aspects of health care delivery, including levels of satisfaction with health care providers among different segments of South African society. Results. Fifty-one percent (n = 1953) of the respondents had attended a primary care facility in the year preceding the interview and were retained in the analysis. Both race and SES were significant predictors of levels of satisfaction with the services of the health care provider, after adjusting for gender, age, and type of facility visited. White and high SES respondents were about 1.5 times more likely to report excellent service compared with Black and low SES respondents, respectively. Conclusion. In South Africa, race and SES are not synonymous and can no longer be considered reliable proxy indicators of one another. Each has distinct and significant but different degrees of association with client satisfaction. Any assessment of equity-driven health policy in South Africa should consider the impacts of both race and SES on client satisfaction as one of the indicators of success. © The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care; all rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Myburgh, N. G., Solanki, G. C., Smith, M. J., & Lalloo, R. (2005). Patient satisfaction with health care providers in South Africa: The influences of race and socioeconomic status. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 17(6), 473–477. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzi062

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free