SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.76 número5Protocolo largo con análogos de GnRH versus protocolo corto con antagonistas: ¿existen diferencias en cuanto a los resultados de los ciclos de FIV-ICSI?Factores obstétricos claves en los resultados neonatales y a los dos años de seguimiento en la prematuridad extrema índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados

Revista

Articulo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

Compartir


Revista chilena de obstetricia y ginecología

versión On-line ISSN 0717-7526

Resumen

CONCHA P, Miriam Ximena  y  URRUTIA S, María Teresa. Calidad de atención programa AUGE cáncer cérvicouterino: diferencias y similitudes entre usuarias y profesionales. Rev. chil. obstet. ginecol. [online]. 2011, vol.76, n.5, pp.294-301. ISSN 0717-7526.  http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0717-75262011000500003.

Background: Cervical Cancer (CC) is a GES pathology. Since its implementation, evaluation of the program's quality of care have not been reported. Objective: Determine the perception of the quality of care received and given in the AUGE Program CC of the Servicio de Salud Metropolitano Sur Oriente. Methodology: Descriptive cross sectional study with a group of 364 users and 59 professionals from the three levels of care. To assess the quality of care of users and professionals was used the instrument INCA-AUGE was used. Results: Dimension I: The grade given by users to this program was a 6.3 versus a 5.9 given by professionals. Dimension II: 78% of users perceive a humane treatment, versus a 48% of professionals which perceive that treatment provided is humane. Dimension III: 40% of women consider that the amount of people working in the program is adequate, unlike professionals that only a 15.3% considers it adequate. Dimension IV: 93% of the group of women perceives to be educated about their disease and treatment versus 64.4% of professionals considers it. Dimension V: 80% of users perceived that the program has adequate materials to provide a good care, versus a 5.1% of professionals who consider them appropriate. Conclusion: The evaluation is generally good being professionals more demanding. There have been identified emerging areas for improvement by comparing the perceptions of users and professionals, key figures involved in the evaluation of the quality of care.

Palabras clave : Cervical cancer; quality of care; AUGE program; health program evaluation.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons