Nama : hasi

Nim : 202001003
Prodi : S1 ilmu keperawatan
Semester : II

Hubungan Kualitas Pelayanan Kesehatan Dengan Kepuasan Pasien Rawat Jalan

1. Variabel Independen : kualitas pelayanan

Variabel Dependen : kepuasan pasien
2. Tujuan Penelitian
a. Untuk mengetahui hubungan kualitas pelayanan kesehatan dengan kepuasan pasien
rawat jalan.
b. Untuk mengetahui hubungan kualitas dimensi ketepatan waktu dengan kepuasan
pasien rawat jalan
c. Untuk mengetahui hubungan antara kualitas dimensi kenyamanan dengan kepuasan
pasien rawat jalan.
3. Analisis univariat
a. Kehandalan pelayanan

kehandalan pelayanan

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Baik 19 63.3 63.3 63.3

kurang 11 36.7 36.7 100.0

Total 30 100.0 100.0

 b. Empati dalam pelayanan

empati dalam pelayanan

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Baik 15 50.0 50.0 50.0

kurang 15 50.0 50.0 100.0

Total 30 100.0 100.0

c. Bukti fisik pelayanan

bukti fisik pelayanan

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent
d. Kepuasan
Valid Baik 24 80.0 80.0 80.0
pasien
kurang 6 20.0 20.0 100.0

Total 30 100.0
kepuasan pasien 100.0

Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent Percent

Valid Puas 18 60.0 60.0 60.0

kurang puas 12 40.0 40.0 100.0

Total 30 100.0 100.0

4. Analisis Bivariat
a. Hubungan kehandalan pelayanan pada kepuasan pasien
 Kehandalan pelayanan * kepuasan Pasien Crosstabulation

kepuasan Pasien

puas kurang puas Total

Kehandalan pelayanan Baik Count 15 4 19

Expected Count 11.4 7.6 19.0

% of Total 50.0% 13.3% 63.3%

kurang Count 3 8 11

Expected Count 6.6 4.4 11.0

% of Total 10.0% 26.7% 36.7%

Total Count 18 12 30

Expected Count 18.0 12.0 30.0

% of Total 60.0% 40.0% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-

Value Df sided) sided) sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 7.751a 1 .005

Continuity Correctionb 5.748 1 .017

Likelihood Ratio 7.933 1 .005

Fisher's Exact Test .009 .008

Linear-by-Linear Association 7.493 1 .006

N of Valid Casesb 30

a. 1 cells (25.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 4.40.

b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

 b. Hubungan empati dalam pelayanan pada kepuasan pasien

empati dalam pelayanan * kepuasan pasien Crosstabulation

kepuasan pasien

puas kurang puas Total

empati dalam pelayanan baik Count 12 3 15

Expected Count 9.0 6.0 15.0

% of Total 40.0% 10.0% 50.0%

kurang Count 6 9 15

Expected Count 9.0 6.0 15.0

% of Total 20.0% 30.0% 50.0%

Total Count 18 12 30

Expected Count 18.0 12.0 30.0

% of Total 60.0% 40.0% 100.0%

Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-

Value df sided) sided) sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 5.000a 1 .025

Continuity Correctionb 3.472 1 .062

Likelihood Ratio 5.178 1 .023

Fisher's Exact Test .060 .030

Linear-by-Linear Association 4.833 1 .028

N of Valid Casesb 30

a. 0 cells (.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 6.00.

b. Computed only for a 2x2 table

 c. Hubungan bukti fisik pelayanan pada kepuasan pasien

hubungan bukti fisik * kepuasan pasien Crosstabulation

kepuasan pasien

puas kurang puas Total

hubungan bukti fisik baik Count 18 6 24

Expected Count 14.4 9.6 24.0

% of Total 60.0% 20.0% 80.0%

kurang Count 0 6 6

Expected Count 3.6 2.4 6.0

% of Total .0% 20.0% 20.0%

Total Count 18 12 30

Expected Count 18.0 12.0 30.0

% of Total 60.0% 40.0% 100.0%

 Chi-Square Tests

Asymp. Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (2- Exact Sig. (1-

Value df sided) sided) sided)

Pearson Chi-Square 11.250a 1 .001

Continuity Correctionb 8.342 1 .004

Likelihood Ratio 13.389 1 .000

Fisher's Exact Test .002 .002

Linear-by-Linear Association 10.875 1 .001

N of Valid Casesb 30

a. 2 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.40.

b. Computed only for a 2x2 table