This research has considered patients’ satisfaction on booking services of dental faculty of Isfahan. As up to date booking, appointment methods have been used from 2017 in dental faculty of Isfahan and no previous research has been done on this context, so it seemed necessary to evaluate the satisfaction on booking method in this study. As Medical university of Isfahan is one of the leading universities of country the results of this study could be very important for the use of other health systems in different states of country. In this research, most of the patients were relatively satisfied with booking services. A significant relationship was observed between the booking method and the level of satisfaction. Patients who had used online booking were more satisfied compared to others. Average score of satisfaction with the waiting time among native patients of Isfahan was higher than that of passenger patients and among passenger patients was higher than that of non-native patients. ). As Isfahan is one the large city in the center of country, some of the patients travel to this city for treatment even from neighbor countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan.
In a study by Bastani et al, on the subject of evaluating the online booking system and websites of health care centers of Iran University of Medical Sciences in 2014, a small number of people used web based booking system. (2) In that study, most appointments were made in person which is inconsistent with the present study since totally 57% of the patients didn't use in person queuing.
In the present study, only about 30% of patients used online booking system. In fact, the researchers concluded that it was simply a matter of arranging appointments with online websites, and that virtual booking service was not considered as a part of not-attendance appointment booking systems. In Cao’s research about the effect of online booking system on waiting time reduction, only 17% of the patients used web based appointment system and more than 50% of them weren't aware of online appointment booking system.(3)
In the present study, 30% of the patients used web based booking system and 50% of them knew about the absentee appointment booking system. Only 19% of the patients did not used absentee booking system after getting informed of that. Based on Nakhai et al, a study about appointment booking systems of private offices in Kerman, the most disaffection was with usual queue method and telephone appointment booking services (4).
The overall satisfaction of patients who booked online appointment was significantly higher than that of other patients. (4)
In the present study, despite the problems related to phone-call based appointment system and usual queue method, most people arranged appointments in these two methods. Among the people who had used online, telephone and usual queuing for booking appointments, the overall satisfaction was significantly higher with the online booking service.
Aktepe et al, found that online booking system had reduced usual queuing and waiting time. It actually saved doctors’ time and increased the quality of booking and patients’ satisfaction. (5)
In our research, the overall satisfaction among the patients who used online appointment services was significantly higher than the other patients’ (P=0/003)
In the study of Maeder et al, about web self-service applications in primary healthcare, it was indicated that arranging online appointment seemed to be so important and most of the patients had used this service again after using it once. (9) But It is contrary to the results of our study.(P=0.15) The convenience of booking appointment process and rebooking in case of oral disease was not significantly different between people who booked appointments in 3 different ways.
Based on the study of Zhang et al, about patients’ experience of web based appointment system using online appointment websites in a hospital in China, the most tolerable waiting time for visiting the doctor was 30 minutes.(10) This time was about 10-20 minutes in our study. Additionally, in Zhang’s research, satisfaction with the waiting time (P=0.01) was significantly different among native, non-native and passenger patients. In our study, it was the same and can be because of the different cultures and the habit of the native patients to this type of booking appointment system. In Zhang’s research, there were no considerable differences in views by patients’ age, occupation and income.
In the study of Pakdaman et al, titled evaluating the level of patients’ satisfaction-comparing comprehensive treatment with other departments of Dental treatment at Tehran University of Medical Sciences, booking appointment service and waiting time have been one of the most important causes of dissatisfaction plus the lowest score of satisfaction. (11)
It is inconsistent with the results of the present study indicating that most of the subjects (68.8%) were generally relatively satisfied with the booking appointment services.
It seems that Pakdaman’s study has reached a conclusion with only one question about the satisfaction of the booking system, while various factors can be considered in examining patients' satisfaction with the booking system. No contract or explanation has been given on how to make appointments in this center. In the present study, several questions have been used to examine patients' satisfaction with booking appointment services and various factors affecting satisfaction.
In the study of YU et al, titled booking appointment systems in Chinese hospitals, most people were oriented toward the method. The booking appointment system was announced by the information brochures in the hospital, and the second most common method of acquaintance was by friends and relatives. Also, in this study, only about 13% of people considered telephone busy signal as the reason for not using the telephone booking system. (12)
In the present study, most people were introduced to the booking system through friends and acquaintances, and therefore the most common way of informing was via brochures. Both of these ways were the most important patient options for familiarity with the booking system, although there were differences between distributions of options in two studies.
Contrary to YU's study, the most common reason for not using the telephone booking system was the busy signal of that. In both studies, the least frequent option was the use of absentee booking systems, due to a lack of knowledge about the choice of department for queuing. In the research of Huang et al, about practice and exploration of appointment registration service for outpatients in Modern Hospital In 2012, most people introduced the method of familiarity with the booking appointment system through the media, which is contrary to our study indicating that media was the least common way.