Determinants of Patient Satisfaction in The United Arab Emirates Health Care Industry

Abstract

Background: The United Arab Emirates is aiming to provide 'world-class healthcare' to its citizens. This study aims to determine the association between overall satisfaction and various aspects of health care services in the United Arab Emirates on a country level.

Methods: The data was collected from 5,855 respondents on the affordability, quality, accessibility, and responsiveness dimensions of health care. Besides frequency tables and descriptive statistics, statistical methods, such as Principal Component Analysis and Multiple Regression, were used to reduce and model the association between dependent (overall satisfaction) and independent (affordability, quality, accessibility, and responsiveness) variables.

Results: The findings indicated higher satisfaction levels with quality and accessibility and lower satisfaction levels with affordability and responsiveness. Recommendations are provided to address the latter two factors.

Conclusion: The study identifies issues in health care service provision in the United Arab Emirates and offers recommendations about enhancing affordability and responsiveness. 

Background

Services are characterized by intangibility, inseparability, heterogeneity, and perishability [1]. Intangibility refers to impalpability, inseparability refers to instantaneous delivery and consumption of services, heterogeneity refers to variability in service delivery and perishability refers to the "time dependency" and "time importance" of services, whereby services cannot be stored for future consumption [2]. Given these attributes of services, an understanding of consumer needs and the subsequent delivery of services is fundamental in service-oriented industries. The appropriate alignment of consumers' needs and expectations and service delivery leads to customer satisfaction [3].

The association between service quality and customer satisfaction has been widely explored in the private sector, including in banking [4-8], the retail industry [9, 10], telecommunications [9], and hospitality [11]. While the importance of service quality is undeniable in the private sector due to its association with organizational profitability, it is of greater importance in education and health care, where the public sector is interested. The satisfaction with these merit goods' service delivery plays an essential role in policy analysis and development [12].

Berry and Seltman argued that health care services are significantly different from other services in several ways [13]. Health care service is delivered as needed [14]; patients do not have control over the type and delivery of skill and labor-intensive procedures that are customized to their needs [15] and are required to relinquish their privacy [13]. Besides, healthcare services delivery is a collaborative process between the service provider and the beneficiary [15].

The quality of health care is measured concerning service quality or clinical quality [16]. While the patients perceive service quality, clinical quality refers to rather hard measures of excellence, such as the proportion of specialists to other doctors, unscheduled returns to the operating room, and in-patient mortality [17, 18]. The service quality in health care is broadly estimated based on a triad between cost, quality, and accessibility often referred to as the 'Iron Triangle' or the 'Triad of Health care' [19]. However, it can also be measured in terms of availability, acceptability, appropriateness, competency, timeliness, privacy, confidentiality, empathy, attentiveness, caring, responsiveness, accountability, accuracy, reliability, comprehensiveness, continuity, equity, environment, and amenities and facilities [20]. The evaluation of consumer perceptions on the above-mentioned overlapping dimensions of service quality enables policymakers to amend or devise policies that may lead to better outcomes and enhance customer satisfaction.

Governments globally face the challenge of providing quality and affordable health care to their citizens while ensuring its sustainability. The costs related to health care are increasing exponentially due to evolving demographics (aging population), a growing population, lifestyle changes leading to non-communicable diseases, technological changes, and rising consumer needs and expectations [21].

The perceived quality should always be measured from the demand-side, from the end-user perspective [22]. Accordingly, this paper aims to focus on the service quality of the health care sector in the UAE and attempt to measure the perceived satisfaction derived from various aspects of health care services in the country. Since service quality in health care is a multidimensional construct [20], patients' perceptions of various dimensions such as affordability, quality of delivery, accessibility, and responsiveness are evaluated. This paper adds to the increasing body of literature available on health care service delivery around the world. It focuses on an oil-exporting country striving to decrease its dependence on oil and diversify its economy. Moreover, the country's health care system is developing and is evolving rapidly to serve the population better despite the current health crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic worldwide.

This study aims to answer the following research question: To what extent do quality, affordability, accessibility, and responsiveness determine overall satisfaction in the UAE health care sector?

Health Care in the United Arab Emirates

The UAE, health care sector, is categorized by public and private service providers' corresponding service utilization. Despite the prominent presence of private health care providers in the country, the general public expenditure as a percentage of the overall health care expenditure is relatively high. Between 2000 and 2015, the proportion of public spending on health care has been approximately 67 percent on average of the total expenditure [23].

The regulatory system in the health care industry in the UAE is multi-tiered and includes federal and emirate level regulatory bodies[1]. The Federal Insurance Authority also plays a crucial role in the UAE health care sector, as the UAE government is transitioning towards universal health coverage for all residents in the UAE [24]. The UAE health care industry is dominated by a handful of private health care providers. During the last few years, the sector's mergers and acquisitions have further consolidated the industry [21].

International accreditation is prevalent and encouraged by the UAE regulatory authorities across the health care sector. According to reports by the Ministry of Health and Prevention, over 70 percent of health care institutions and facilities have been accredited by international bodies. In contrast, the other facilities are accredited by 2021, according to reports by the Ministry of Health and Prevention [25, 48]. Despite international accreditation of health care facilities, the standardization measures of quality lack throughout local private and public health care providers.

The importance of the insurance industry is paramount universally. The UAE's insurance industry is fragmented, with 61 insurance companies [26] serving a population of approximately nine million people (Federal Competitiveness and Statistics Authority, 2018). The top five insurance companies have a collective market share of 56.2 percent [27].

There has been significant development across the UAE's healthcare system over the last two decades, including improvements in accessibility, affordability, and service delivery of clinical quality. With such developments, the UAE government continuously financed the health industry over the years, ensuring health care delivery to the population, even though falling oil revenues. One of the dilemmas is to stabilize the healthcare-related costs while extending accessibility and sustaining the quality of health care and affordability. 

The National Agenda 2021 for UAE involves several indicators: health care, education, economy, justice, police and security, society, housing, infrastructure, and government services [28]. Under the realm of health care, the UAE government plans to cooperate with all strategic stakeholders in the health care sector and other sectors to provide health care according to clear national and international quality standards and seeks to focus on preventive medicine and to reduce the prevalence of non-communicable diseases in the country [28]. In line with these objectives, AED 4.84 billion (6.89 percent of the annual budget 2020) has been allocated to health care and social services programs [29]. The actions aim to improve both clinical and service quality in the UAE health care sector.

This paper will primarily focus on evaluating the perceptions regarding various dimensions of service quality. The results will facilitate an understanding of challenges in health care services in the UAE.

Literature Review

The Iron Triangle of Health Care developed by Kissick in 1994 identified three critical elements for patient satisfaction: Quality, Cost, and Accessibility. The model is based on the principle of opportunity cost and trade-off, where all three elements are interdependent, and the achievement of two factors will only occur at the expense of the third [19].

Extensive literature is available on quality in health care, and several definitions of quality have been proposed. According to Mosadeghrad [20] quality in health care can be excellence, value, conform to standards and guidelines, and meet customer needs and expectations. Compliance with these dimensions of quality would result in satisfied end-users or ultimate beneficiaries of the health care service. A patient-centered approach in health care provision dictates "... [quality is that which] exceeds patient expectations and achieves the highest possible clinical outcomes with the resources available" [2]. This encompasses the health care service's clinical and service quality dimensions, encircling care, and service aspects. Donabedian in 1980 [30] referred to these aspects as technical quality and interpersonal quality. Donabedian highlighted that a distinction is drawn between care in health care provision, which is related to the direct technical intervention (i.e., treatment, medication, check-ups, etc.) and service, which is concerned with the patients' experience of their interaction with the health care provider [30]. However, both care and service are interconnected and inseparable and are essential to the overall quality of the patients' experience. While patients might not necessarily be able to assess the technical elements of care, they can evaluate their service quality experience. Cohen highlighted that patients tend to give more weight to the interpersonal aspects of their experience with the health care provider [31].

Several factors contribute to the importance of patient satisfaction as a tool to help health care providers understand patients' perspectives and enhance overall quality. First, patient satisfaction and patient loyalty were found to be correlated. For example, in Yemen, a study found that patients' satisfaction with reliability, empathy, and assurance had a significant influence on patient loyalty [32]. Similarly, Mortazavi et al. [33] concluded that there is a significant correlation between patient satisfaction and patient loyalty in nursing care, operating rooms, admission, and administration.

Second, patients can be viewed as customers from a consumerist perspective, especially in private healthcare providers' competitive market. Therefore, when health care delivery is commodified, patient (or consumer), satisfaction is crucial to organizational profitability. Patients are empowered to leave the consumption loop due to dissatisfaction and find other options [34]. While there is a direct link between organizational profitability and patient satisfaction [35], the latter can reduce costs associated with resolving customer complaints [36].

Lastly, various aspects of patient satisfaction contribute to policy and organizational reform [37]. Although patient satisfaction surveys are not widely utilized in health care service assessment [38], they can identify performance gaps and indicate improvement areas.

Some health care professionals might dismiss patient satisfaction as being too subjective to determine health care quality [38]; however, patient-centered approaches to health care emphasize the importance of satisfying patients' expectations. In this sense, patient-satisfaction is an evaluative process in which a patient cognitively and emotionally reacts to the health care they receive [39]. Therefore, it is integral to include recipients' perceptions of service quality in the evaluation of overall satisfaction.

Another important aspect of health care is cost; synonymously used with the term affordability. As a generic term, affordability can be best defined as a measure of someone's purchasing power towards a good or service [40]. According to Glickman [41], "affordability is not a synonym for low prices. It describes a qualitative ability to pay - an interaction of price, disposable income, and judgments about the necessity of a particular good." Accordingly, affordability of health care reflects the end user's purchasing power, derived from his disposable income, to pay for health care services.

To personalize the actual cost and affordability of health care, Emanuel et al. [42] proposed developing an "Affordability Index,"[2] which relates the average cost of health care to the average household income. The authors themselves indicated that the index is not perfect in determining the affordability of health care services. Glickman [41] highlighted several limitations of the index, such as regional and national variability in health care spending, the cost of insurance subsidized insurance for low-income families, and double counting employer contributions to premiums. The index also has a limitation concerning its universal applicability as many countries do not have universal or sponsored insurance.

Accessibility to health care is a complex and multidimensional construct. Levesque et al. highlighted that the literature on health care defines and operationalizes accessibility concerning financial physical and geographical accessibility, predisposing and enabling factors, availability, accommodation, affordability, acceptability, adequacy, and cultural acceptability [40]. Gulliford et al. broke-down access into "having" sufficient health care providers or, in other terms, availability and gaining access to such providers, which depends on actual utilization and affordability [43].

One aspect of accessibility is the availability of health care services when required, which can be operationalized, for example, as the number of patient-physician contacts [44]. Besides, availability can be determined by the number of hospitals and clinics, the number of beds in each institution, and physicians and nurses [45]. Mosadeghrad [20] argued that accessibility (physical, financial, and conceptual) is crucial, while availability is essential. The author highlighted that accessibility is especially critical when the service costs are high, and insurance is unavailable. Gulliford et al. argued that from a policy perspective, facilitating access to health care refers to helping people to utilize appropriate health resources to preserve or improve their health [43].

Besides the factors discussed above, Mosadeghrad [20] found that responsiveness in health care service provision is also relevant, mainly because information asymmetry exists between patients and service providers. This quality aspect may include active listening, trust, respect, confidentiality, courtesy, and effective communication, referred to as interpersonal aspects [31]. Lack of perceived responsiveness on the part of the service provider may lead to lower levels of satisfaction among healthcare services [46].

Besides the factors discussed above, the literature discusses many other factors that determine perceived service quality in health care provision [20]. It is evident that various aspects of health care delivery are highly interdependent, and their operationalization varies significantly in the literature [40]. This paper primarily focuses on three factors (cost, quality, accessibility), as suggested by Kissick [19], and responsiveness in the UAE health care sector.

[1] The Ministry of Health and Prevention regulates the health care sector on a federal level (UAE Ministry of Health and Prevention, 2020). The emirate-level regulatory authorities regulate health care providers in Abu Dhabi, Dubai, and Sharjah. (Department of Health - Abu Dhabi, 2018; Dubai Health Authority, 2020; Sharjah Health Authority, 2020). Besides these, all the private companies in the Dubai Health Care City are regulated by a separate entity (Dubai Health Care City Authority, 2020).

[2] Affordability Index is a ratio that relates health insurance costs to household incomes over time. It is calculated by dividing the mean cost of an employer-sponsored family health insurance policy by median household income.

Method

The literature affirms that overall satisfaction with health care services is associated with various dimensions, such as quality, cost, accessibility, approachability, and responsiveness, to name a few. This study intends to investigate whether or not these associations are relevant in the context of the UAE. Based on the research question, the study hypothesizes that there is no association between quality, affordability, accessibility, responsiveness, and overall satisfaction in the UAE health care sector.

Given the study's nature, quantitative analysis is most appropriate for data collection and analysis. Quantitative research methods allow broad data collection and analysis across many respondents [47, 48].

The target population for the research study consisted of citizens and residents of the UAE.[1] The study data was collected by YouGov and the Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government in Dubai. A convenience sampling method was used to collect data. While the use of a convenience sample may impact how representative a sample is, a larger sample size may mitigate this limitation to some extent.

The appropriate sample size for a population of 9,121,170 was calculated through the Raosoft Sample Size calculator as an estimate [49, 50]. A sample size of n=3,382 was found to be suitable; however, the actual sample size exceeded the appropriate sample size by approximately 65 percent, and n was equal to 5,855.

The respondents were asked to provide socio-demographic information, which is summarized in Table 1. They were also asked to indicate whether or not they have a regular general physician, whether they have visited a doctor in the last three years, and lastly, whether they intend to go back to their home countries for medical consultation.

The survey items for the health services factors were adopted from the survey developed by Marshall and Hays [51] with the authors' permission. The use of SERVQUAL [52] survey is standard in the health care literature. However, this study opted for the above instrument as it was deemed appropriate for exploratory research across the UAE's health care sector and was not targeted to a particular service provider. While eighteen questions were included in the survey, nine affirmative questions were used for data analysis. The survey was produced in English and was then translated into Arabic. These questions were classified under overall satisfaction, quality, affordability, accessibility, and responsiveness. The responses to all the questions were recorded on a 5-point Likert scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

The English and Arabic surveys were disseminated online. The survey instrument fully complied with the ethics guidelines. All appropriate procedures related to informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity, participants' rights, and participation conditions, including the right to refuse or withdraw without penalty, were observed for the study.

A multi-step data analysis was employed to draw a conclusion about the sample and infer a conclusion about the population. In the first step, preliminary studies such as frequency tables, descriptive statistics, and correlation estimates were produced. The correlations were used to determine the need for principal component analysis (PCA) with varimax rotation. In the last step of the analysis, the components extracted through PCA were used in a multiple regression model to estimate the association between overall satisfaction and various dimensions of service quality in the UAE health care industry.

Principle Component Analysis

PCA is used for dimension reduction in the presence of a large number of variables and multicollinearity. However, another statistical method, such as regression or structural equation, needs to be subsequently used to estimate dependence between the derived and dependent variables.

To ensure the parsimony of the multiple regression model, PCA was employed for dimension reduction. The need for PCA was determined by estimating correlations between the variables included in the data collection instrument (refer to Table 4).

Field [53] indicated that the sample size is of primary consideration when using any form of factor analysis. Since the sample size in this study is substantially large relative to the number of variables involved, the use of PCA is deemed appropriate. The appropriateness of the sample size is determined by the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy (KMO). Kaiser [54] indicated that KMO values ranging between 0.7 and 0.9 are considered to be good. In addition to the sample size, Bartlett's test determined the strength of the relationship between variables. A p-value less than the significance level (α = 0.05) associated with Bartlett's test statistic is indicative of the appropriateness of using factor analysis.

The appropriate number of factors extracted is determined by 'eigenvalues' and 'scree plots.' The factors having eigenvalues of one or greater than one generally is retained. All such elements explain the most variance and are suitable for statistical methods determining the association between the dependent variable and independent factors.

Multiple Regression Analysis

Regression analysis enables the study to find an association between one dependent variable and one or more independent variables. The regression equation requires the variables to be numeric. This study uses one dependent variable: the respondents' overall satisfaction and four independent variables that resulted from the PCA. The independent variables are classified under cost, quality, accessibility, and responsiveness.

The resulting regression equation can be written as

Overall Satisfaction = β₀ + β₁ (Affordability) + β₂ (Quality) + β₃ (Accessibility) + β₄ (Responsiveness) + ε

Where

β₀ is the constant term

β₁ to β₄ are the coefficients of the factor's affordability, quality, accessibility, and responsiveness, and

ε is the error term

The coefficients' magnitude will ascertain the importance of each factor in determining the respondents' overall satisfaction concerning various dimensions of health care services in the UAE. 

Results

Table 1 presents the profile of the respondents. The male respondents comprised 59 percent of the sample. The sample appears to represent the population concerning age, population distribution across the seven emirates, and population composition (Emiratis and non-Emiratis) [55, 56].  

For education and income, 53 percent of the participants indicated having a Bachelor's degree, approximately 34 percent reported having some form of postgraduate education, and 78 percent of the respondents specified having a monthly income of AED 25,000 or less. Nearly 50 percent of the respondents indicated having a sponsored insurance plan. Approximately 66 percent of the sample does not have a family physician, and 20 percent reported not having a medical check-up in the last three years. Moreover, 51 percent of the respondents intend to go back to their home countries for medical treatment if the need arises.

The frequencies of responses to various questions are presented in Table 2. Two factors stand out clearly – responsiveness and affordability. While all the other factors recorded a higher number of responses on the right side of the spectrum, that is, agreed and strongly agreed, the responsiveness and cost factors have a high percentage of neutral responses, 42 percent, and 36 percent, respectively. This neutrality, while ambiguous, may be interpreted as dissatisfaction with health care services on these dimensions.

This interpretation also strengthens due to low means and medians associated with responsiveness (mean 3.19; median 3) and affordability (mean 3.31; median 3). All other factors recorded a mean and median of 4, indicating relatively higher satisfaction levels with them.

The correlations between various factors were statistically significant (α = 0.01). The correlation estimates were relatively high (refer to Table 4), suggesting interdependence between various variables. Accordingly, PCA was employed for dimension reduction.

The KMO of 0.88 indicated the suitability of employed PCA for dimension reduction purposes. Accordingly, three factors were identified a priori, and these three factors (quality, accessibility, and responsiveness) explained nearly 71 percent of cumulative variance. The affordability factor was excluded from the PCA as it had only one question, and it was then included as a separate independent variable in the multiple regression equation.

As presented in Table 5, the quality of health care service delivery in the UAE has the highest Eigenvalue (>3) and explains nearly 50 percent of the total variance. The other two factors are also important; however, the Eigenvalues are less than one. The percentage of variance explained by them is approximately one-fifth of the quality aspect and ranges between 10-11%.

In the last step of data analysis, four aspects (quality, accessibility, responsiveness, and affordability) were included in multiple regression analysis. The estimated model was statistically significant (F-statistic 1764.265; p-value 0.000), with an R² of 0.547 and an adjusted R² of 0.546. The R² and adjusted R² values indicate that nearly 55 percent of the perceived overall satisfaction variability can be explained by the four factors included in the model as independent variables. There is a negligible difference between R² and adjusted R² values suggesting that the specification of the model is appropriate, and all the factors are relevant in estimating the model. All the independent variables are statistically significant, with a p-value of 0.00 (α = 0.05). Quality has the highest coefficient, followed by accessibility, responsiveness, and, lastly, affordability. The positive coefficients indicate that better perceptions related to all the four factors would lead to higher overall satisfaction.

Based on the results of multiple regression, the model can be presented as:

Overall Satisfaction from Healthcare Delivery in the UAE = 3.32 + 0.51 (Quality) + 0.28 (Accessibility) + 0.18 (Responsiveness) + 0.11 (Affordability)

The multiple regression model results indicate statistically significant relationships between the dependent and independent variables under consideration. Therefore, there is enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis.

Discussion

Based on the data analysis results, responsiveness and affordability appear to be lagging on customer satisfaction. Both responsiveness and affordability have a positive association with overall satisfaction. This indicates that when the customers' expectations concerning these two factors are met, the perceived total satisfaction with health care services will increase. While affordability has the lowest coefficient among the four aspects of health care delivery in the UAE, the factor is statistically significant in the model, and therefore, requires attention. It also appears that the respondents perceive that doctors do not spend adequate time with them.

The demand and supply gap of health care services has led to increased demand-side costs, resulting in a negative impact on the affordability of health care in the UAE [57]. The country is considered to be one of the most expensive destinations in the Middle East for medical treatment. At the same time, the average price of a doctor's visit is US$ 69, with an approximate 80 percent higher as compared with Singapore and 240 percent higher than in Saudi Arabia [57, 58]. Moreover, the UAE's medical inflation is estimated to be 9.9 percent, which is the highest in the GCC [21]. The UAE government has chosen to present price control mechanisms for health services and medicines [59] to ensure that the health care services' eventual recipients are not experiencing extremely higher costs. Besides, the UAE government is transitioning towards universal health coverage for the population [24, 60-63] to reduce out-of-pocket health care expenses.

As discussed in section 2, the UAE's health care sector appears to be consolidated with a few players in the market. While having a few large players in the industry may promote investments in technology and human capital, it may also entail the risk that more significant players may exploit the end-users by offering high cost but low-quality services. Reducing the multi-level regulatory burden may lead to lower entry barriers and promote competition, leading to increased affordability and improved service quality.

Unlike the UAE health care industry, the insurance industry is fragmented, with 61 insurance companies serving a population of approximately nine million. This negatively impacts insurance companies' capacity to achieve economies of scale and scope and invest in providing cost-effective health insurance policies to retail and corporate customers, which would result in increased affordability. The UAE government has made efforts to consolidate the insurance industry by raising capital requirements for the insurance providers. However, concentrated efforts may be required to strengthen the insurance industry to drive the health insurance premiums down. A well-developed and mature insurance sector will enable risk pooling and diversification, resulting in lower costs and premiums for the insurers and the insured, respectively.

The findings related to responsiveness require further investigation. According to the Dubai Health Authority [64] annual statistics report, there are 2.9 doctors for every 1,000 residents (0.5 percentage points decline as compared to 2016) in Dubai. This ratio is high compared to that in many developed countries. For example, the United States of America, Canada, and the United Kingdom is reported by the World Health Organization to have 2.6 (2014), 2.5 (2015), and 2.8 (2016) doctors per 1,000 residents, respectively [65]. Having a comparable density of physicians with developed countries does not indicate human capital's sufficiency in the health care industry. The shortage of doctors leads to increased pressure to spend less time with patients, resulting in displeasure on the service quality's responsiveness factor. The most obvious solution to this is to increase the number of physicians. This can be achieved by encouraging youth in the country to opt for medicine as a career of choice and attract foreign talent. The recent announcement regarding changes in the immigration laws may pave the way for qualified foreign doctors to join the UAE workforce.

Conclusion

This paper aimed to examine the association between overall satisfaction and affordability, quality, accessibility, and responsiveness in the UAE health care sector. Statistical analysis techniques such as PCA and multiple regression were used to model the relationship between the dependent and independent variables. The use of PCA enabled data-driven dimension reduction, resulting in the four factors mentioned above. The results of data analysis highlighted responsiveness and affordability as the most concerning factors for respondents. While the sample was large and appeared to represent the UAE population in some aspects, the use of convenience sampling may limit the generalizability of the findings. The study can be extended by classifying the respondents according to their socio-demographic profiles and evaluating whether significant differences exist between perceptions of different groups of respondents. Furthermore, a study can be conducted to isolate the perceptions of those respondents who intended to have medical treatment in their home countries.

Abbreviations

GCC: Gulf Cooperation Countries

KMO: Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy

PCA: Principle Component Analysis

UAE: United Arab Emirates

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The local level ethical committee considered this project to be a health quality research project among the public 18 years or older (REC-04-017). The ethics approval (REC-04-017) was provided by the MBR School of Government Research Ethics Committee within the Government of Dubai, United Arab Emirates. The consent the authors obtained from study participants was written, at the beginning of the survey, where the participant was informed of his/her rights in participating in the survey, and if agree to proceed further, and at any time they wanted to leave the survey, they can proceed to exit the survey.

Consent for publication

Not Applicable- the manuscript does not contain data from any individual person.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Funding

The research funding source was provided by the Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government, Dubai, UAE.

Authors' contributions

HS: Made a substantial contribution to all the sections. Participated in review, analysis, and interpretation and drafted the manuscript and revised it critically for important intellectual content. IAM: Made a substantial contribution to the background, methods, and discussion sections. Involved in drafting the manuscript and revising it critically for important intellectual content. LZ: Made a significant contribution to study design. Participated in review, analysis, and interpretation. MM: Made a substantial contribution to background and method sections. All authors give final approval for the version to be published and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research at the World Health Organization for financial support as part of the Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center Mentorship Program [BIRD Project].

Authors' information (optional)

Hameedah Sayani

CEO, Zindagi Trust (Economic & Social Policy)

Karachi, Pakistan

[email protected]

Immanuel Azaad Moonesar (Corresponding Author)

Associate Professor, Health Administration & Policy

Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government

[email protected]

Lama Zakzak

Associate Researcher, Social Policy

Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government

[email protected]

Mona Mostafa Elsholkamy

Assistant Professor, Public Administration & Economic Policy

Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government

[email protected]

References

1. Zeithaml VA, Parasuraman A, Berry LL. Problems and strategies in services marketing. Journal of marketing. 1985 Mar;49(2):33-46.
2. Ovretveit J. Health service quality: an introduction to quality methods for health services. Blackwell Scientific; 1992.
3. Pont M, McQuilken L. An empirical investigation of customer satisfaction and loyalty across two divergent bank segments. Journal of Financial Services Marketing. 2005 Jun 1;9(4):344-59.
4. Hallowell R. The relationships of customer satisfaction, customer loyalty, and profitability: an empirical study. International journal of service industry management. 1996 Oct 1.
5. Mihelis G, Grigoroudis E, Siskos Y, Politis Y, Malandrakis Y. Customer satisfaction measurement in the private bank sector. European Journal of Operational Research. 2001 Apr 16;130(2):347-60.
6. Al-Eisa AS, Alhemoud AM. Using a multiple-attribute approach for measuring customer satisfaction with retail banking services in Kuwait. The international journal of bank marketing. 2009 Jun 12;27(4):294-314.
7. Sayani H. Customer satisfaction and loyalty in the United Arab Emirates banking industry. International Journal of Bank Marketing. 2015 May 18.
8. Sayani H, Miniaoui H. Determinants of bank selection in the United Arab Emirates. International Journal of Bank Marketing. 2013 Apr 5.
9. Eskildsen J, Kristensen K, JØrn Juhl H, Østergaard P. The drivers of customer satisfaction and loyalty. The case of Denmark 2000–2002. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 2004 Jul 1;15(5-6):859-68.
10. Elmelegy AR, Ponnaiyan S, Alnajem MN. Antecedents of hypermarket service quality in the united arab emirates. Quality Management Journal. 2017 Jan 1;24(4):35-48.
11. He Y, Li W, Lai KK. Service climate, employee commitment and customer satisfaction. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2011 Jul 12.
12. Fonseca JR. How satisfied are Portuguese citizens with public hospitals' service?. International journal of health care quality assurance. 2013 Jul 12.
13. Berry LL, Seltman KD. Management lessons from mayo clinic. McGraw-Hill Professional Publishing; 2008.
14. Bendapudi NM, Berry LL, Frey KA, Parish JT, Rayburn WL. Patients' perspectives on ideal physician behaviors. InMayo Clinic Proceedings 2006 Mar 1 (Vol. 81, No. 3, pp. 338-344). Elsevier.
15. Berry LL, Bendapudi N. Health care: a fertile field for service research. Journal of Service Research. 2007 Nov;10(2):111-22.
16. Lim MK. Quest for quality care and patient safety: the case of Singapore. BMJ Quality & Safety. 2004 Feb 1;13(1):71-5.
17. Mainz J. Defining and classifying clinical indicators for quality improvement. International journal for quality in health care. 2003 Dec 1;15(6):523-30.
18. Yildiz Ö, Demirors O. Healthcare quality indicators–a systematic review. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance. 2014 Apr 3.
19. Kissick WL. Medicine's dilemmas: infinite needs versus finite resources. Yale University Press; 1994.
20. Mosadeghrad AM. Healthcare service quality: towards a broad definition. International journal of health care quality assurance. 2013 Mar 15.
21. Alpen Capital. (2018). GCC health care industry. Reftrived on 2 July 2018 from http://www.alpencapital.com/downloads/reports/2018/GCC-Health care-Industry-Report-March-2018.pdf
22. Reeves CA, Bednar DA. Defining quality: alternatives and implications. Academy of management Review. 1994 Jul 1;19(3):419-45.
23. World Bank. (2018). United Arab Emirates Data, Retrieved on 25 June, 2018 from https://data.worldbank.org/country/united-arab-emirates 
24. Alshamsan R, Leslie H, Majeed A, Kruk M. Financial hardship on the path to Universal Health Coverage in the Gulf States. Health Policy. 2017 Mar 1;121(3):315-20.
25. Gulf News. (2017). All hospitals will have international accreditation by 2021 Retrieved from: https://gulfnews.com/uae/health/all-hospitals-will-have-international-accreditation-by-2021-1.2104886
26. Insurance Authority. The annual report on the uae insurance sector. 2018. https://ia.gov.ae/en/Documents/The%20Annual%20Report%20on%20the%20UAE%20Insurance%20Sector%20for%202015.pdf . Accessed 22 July 2018.
27. Milliman Market Monitor UAE. (2017). Market monitor uae - preliminary insurance disclosures. Retrieved on 2 July 2018 from http://ae.milliman.com/uploadedFiles/insight/2017/Milliman-Market-Monitor-UAE-2016.pdf.
28. UAE Vision 2021. (2018). National Agenda 2021. Retrieved on 1 July 2018 from https://www.vision2021.ae/en/national-agenda-2021.
29. Ministry of Finance UAE. (2019). Federal Budget 2018. Retrieved on 31^st March 2020 from https://www.mof.gov.ae/en/resourcesAndBudget/fedralBudget/Pages/budget2020.aspx
30. Donabedian A. Quality assessment and monitoring: retrospect and prospect. Evaluation & the health professions. 1983 Sep;6(3):363-75.
31. Cohen G. Age and health status in a patient satisfaction survey. Social science & medicine. 1996 Apr 1;42(7):1085-93.
32. Anbori A, Ghani SN, Yadav H, Daher AM, Su TT. Patient satisfaction and loyalty to the private hospitals in Sana'a, Yemen. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. 2010 Aug 1;22(4):310-5.
33. Mortazavi S, Kazemi M, Shirazi A, Azizabadi A. The relationships between patient satisfaction and loyalty in the private hospital industry. 2009 Jul 3.
34. Owusu‐Frimpong N, Nwankwo S, Dason B. Measuring service quality and patient satisfaction with access to public and private healthcare delivery. International Journal of Public Sector Management. 2010 Apr 6.
35. Suki NM, Lian JC, Suki NM. Do patients' perceptions exceed their expectations in private healthcare settings? International journal of health care quality assurance. 2011 Jan 11.
36. Pakdil F, Harwood TN. Patient satisfaction in a preoperative assessment clinic: an analysis using SERVQUAL dimensions. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence. 2005 Jan 1;16(1):15-30.
37. Blendon RJ, Leitman R, Morrison I, Donelan K. Satisfaction with health systems in ten nations. Health Affairs. 1990;9(2):185-92.
38. Holt JM. The autonomous patient: ending paternalism in medical care. Clinical Medicine. 2003 Nov 1;3(6):589.
39. Pascoe GC. Patient satisfaction in primary health care: a literature review and analysis. Evaluation and program planning. 1983 Jan 1;6(3-4):185-210.
40. Levesque JF, Harris MF, Russell G. Patient-centred access to health care: conceptualising access at the interface of health systems and populations. International journal for equity in health. 2013 Dec 1;12(1):18.
41. Glickman A, Johnson D. Measuring the burden of health care costs on US families: the affordability index. Jama. 2017 Nov 21;318(19):1863-4.
42. Emanuel EJ, Glickman A, Johnson D. Measuring the burden of health care costs on US families: the affordability index. Jama. 2017 Nov 21;318(19):1863-4.
43. Gulliford M, Figueroa-Munoz J, Morgan M, Hughes D, Gibson B, Beech R, Hudson M. What does' access to health care'mean?. Journal of health services research & policy. 2002 Jul 1;7(3):186-8.
44. Turner PD, Pol LG. Beyond patient satisfaction. Marketing Health Services. 1995 Oct 1;15(3):45.
45. Tucker JL. The moderators of patient satisfaction. Journal of Management in Medicine. 2002 Feb 1.
46. Naidu A. Factors affecting patient satisfaction and healthcare quality. International journal of health care quality assurance. 2009 Jun 12.
47. Creswell JW, Creswell JD. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications; 2017 Nov 27.
48. Al-alawy, K. Moonesar, IA. Obaid, H. Gaafar, R. & Bawadi, E. A Mixed-Methods Study To Explore The Impact of Hospital Accreditation. INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care Organization, Provision, and Financing. Sage publications; 2020 Nov 27.
49. Raosoft Inc. (2004). Sample size calculator. Retrieved on 10 September 2017 from http://www.raosoft.com/samplesize.html?nosurvey
50. Wilson V. Research methods: sampling. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice. 2016 Mar 4;11(1 (S)):69-71.
51. Marshall GN, Hays RD. The patient satisfaction questionnaire short-form (PSQ-18). 1994.
52. Parasuraman A, Zeithaml VA, Berry LL. A conceptual model of service quality and its implications for future research. Journal of marketing. 1985 Sep;49(4):41-50.
53. Field A. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. sage; 2013 Feb 20.
54. Kaiser HF. Psychometrika. Springer) The Varimax Criterion for Analytic Rotation in Factor Analysis. 1958;23:187.
55. Federal Competitiveness and Statistics Authority. (2018). Population estimates. Retrievd on 22 July 2018 from http://fcsa.gov.ae/en-us/Pages/Statistics/Statistics-by-Subject.aspx#/%3Fsubject=Population%20and%20Demographic
56. ae. (2018). Population and demographic mix . Retrieved on 22 July 2018 from https://www.government.ae/en/about-the-uae/fact-sheet
57. Sayani, H., Moonesar, I.A., Elsholkamy, M.M. & Zakzak, L. Promoting Synergies for the Attainment of Sustainable Development Goals in the UAE Health Care Sector. Mohammed Bin Rashid School of Government: Dubai, United Arab Emirates. 2019.
58. Alshareef N, Angawi K, Moonesar IA. The State of Saudi Arabi Healthcare Service Delivery: Public Perceptions. Journal of Health Informatics in Developing Countries. 2020 Jul 22;14(2).
59. The National. (2014). Dubai curbs cost of health care. Retrieved on 2 July 2018 from https://www.thenational.ae/business/dubai-curbs-cost-of-health-care-1.464399
60. UAE Ministry of Health and Prevention. UAE Ministry of Health and Prevention. Retrieved on 26 June 2020 from http://www.mohap.gov.ae/en/Pages/default.aspx.
61. Department of Health Abu Dhabi. Retrievd on 2 July 2020 from https://www.haad.ae/haad/tabid/59/Default.aspx
62. Dubai Health care City Authority. Dubai Health care City Authority. Retrieved on 2 July 2020 from https://www.dhcr.gov.ae/en/.
63. Sharjah Health Authority. Sharjah Health Authority. Retrieved on 2 July 2020 from http://sha.gov.ae/en/.
64. Dubai Health Authority. Dubai annual health statistical report. Retrieved on 22 September 2020 from https://www.dha.gov.ae/DHAOpenData/Annual%20Statistical%20Books/Annual%20Statistical%20Report%202017.pdf
65. World Health Organization. Density of physicians (total number per 1000 population, latest available year). Global Health Observatory (GHO) data. 2017 Dec 4.

Tables

Table 1: Respondents’ Profile

Table2: Frequency Tables and Descriptive Statistics

1 = Strongly Disagree; 2 = Disagree; 3 = Uncertain; 4 = Agree; 5 = Strongly Agree

Table 3: Correlations

Table 4: Principal Component Analysis

Table 5: Multiple Regression

*Significant at the 0.01 level