Patient satisfaction as a quality indicator in dermatological care: cross-sectional study in two tertiary...

Patient satisfaction is a key indicator of healthcare quality and plays a crucial role in strengthening the physician-patient relationship. In dermatology, it contributes to greater treatment adherence and improved clinical outcomes, particularly in chronic skin conditions. However, limited studies have comprehensively evaluated the factors influencing satisfaction in outpatient dermatological settings, especially in academic institutions.

To identify factors associated with patient satisfaction during in-person dermatology visits at two tertiary care hospitals with postgraduate training programs and measure global satisfaction.

A cross-sectional analytical study was conducted using a structured survey assessing six domains of care: physician interaction, verbal and non-verbal communication, consult timing, privacy, teaching activity, and infrastructure. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to determine variables associated with overall satisfaction, adjusting for potential confounders.

Most patients reported high satisfaction ([90.5%]), particularly with physician interaction. Key predictors of dissatisfaction included: inadequate bedside manner (Aor = 0.01 [95% CI 0.00-0.04], p < 0.001), discomfort during physical examination (aOR = 0.17 [95% CI 0.05-0.60], p = 0.006), presence of students during medical interview (aOR = 0.13 [95% CI 0.04-0.42], p < 0.001), and not use of white lab coat (aOR = 0.06 [95% CI 0.02-0.25], p < 0.001).

The cross-sectional design prevents causal inference, and subjective responses may be influenced by social desirability bias. Context-specific findings may limit generalizability.

Physician bedside manners, communication, and teaching dynamics significantly affect patient satisfaction. Targeted interventions in medical training and institutional policies may improve patient-centered care outcomes. Associations observed were statistically robust, minimizing the risk of spurious conclusions.