See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319528275

ASSESSMENT OF PATIENT'S WAITING TIME IN THE RADIOLOGY

DEPARTMENTS IN OWERRI, IMO STATE, NIGERIA

Article · April 2017

CITATIONS READS

0 2,424

1 author:

Daniel Chimuanya Ugwuanyi

Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka
61 PUBLICATIONS   34 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Radiography View project

Quality Control in x-ray equipment View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Daniel Chimuanya Ugwuanyi on 07 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

ejbps, 2017, Volume 4, Issue 5, 597-602. Research Article SJIF Impact Factor 4.382

Ugwuanyi et al. European Journal of Biomedical

European Journal ISSN 2349-8870
of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences
Volume: 4
AND Pharmaceutical sciences Issue: 5
597-602
http://www.ejbps.com Year: 2017

ASSESSMENT OF PATIENT’S WAITING TIME IN THE RADIOLOGY DEPARTMENTS

IN OWERRI, IMO STATE, NIGERIA

Ugwuanyi D. C.*, Chiegwu H. U., Eze J. C. and Okoli M. C.

Department of Medical Radiography and Radiological Sciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nnewi Campus,
Anambra State, Nigeria.

*Corresponding Author: Ugwuanyi D. C.

Department of Medical Radiography and Radiological Sciences, Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Nnewi Campus, Anambra State, Nigeria.

Article Received on 19/03/2017 Article Revised on 09/04/2017 Article Accepted on 30/04/2017

ABSTRACT
Radiography has seen itself at the centre of modern medicine as a diagnostic tool in diagnosing treating and
managing ailment. Unlike other arms of the hospital that are designed to carter for specific kinds of illnesses, the
radiology department provides services that are utilized by almost every patient. Waiting time in radiology could
be defined as the time between when a patient present at the radiology department for an investigation, and the
time the investigation is done and a report written on the outcome of the investigation. The study was done to
assess the factors affecting patient waiting time in radiology Department/ Centre’s in Owerri, Imo state, Nigeria.
The study was also a cross-sectional survey that used over 150 people (over 20 Radiographers and over 120
patients), who are present during the study. The data collection instrument was 15 items, self-completion
questionnaire for the radiographers and a 14 item, self-completion questionnaire for the patient. The questionnaire
included demographic characteristics of patients and radiographers and 98% of the total questionnaire was
returned. Both descriptive and inferential statistical test were done. Test were 2 tailed with p<0.05 indicating
statistics significant. The results showed that lateness, volume of patient, and level of satisfaction in the
department were perceived by the patients while lack of staff, faulty equipment and restriction of radiographers to
report images were perceived by the radiographers as factors significantly affecting patient waiting time. The
patient waiting time in the department has been implicated to be the leading cause of patient’s satisfaction in the
department. From this study, it was observed that the patient was indifferent in their level of satisfaction in the
department. This implied that they are either satisfied or not satisfied with the service provided in the department.

KEYWORDS: Patient’s waiting time, Radiology Department, Owerri.

INTRODUCTION There has been an increase in demand for the services

Radiography has seen itself at the centre of modern provided by radiology departments or centers and thus an
medicine as a diagnostic tool in diagnosing treating and improvement in the efficiency of the radiology workers
managing ailment. Since its establishment in 1845 via to reduce patients waiting time is of great important
the discovery of x-ray, they have been sophistication in (Scott, 2006).
its application in terms of equipment, protection etc in
the diagnostic and therapeutic services in which it is used The diversity of inputs and range of services provided
for in most health centers. It then does not come as a makes the radiology department a very complex system
surprise the number of patients that pass through the to run (Cirano’ kane, 1981).
department. Unlike other arms of the hospital that are
designed to carter for specific kinds of illnesses, the The National Health Service is increasingly regarding
radiology department provides services that are utilized patients as consumer of a service, and as such, aims to
by almost every patient. This translates to a radiology provide consumer satisfaction (Booth et al., 1992).
department besieged with countless requests for various Patients arriving the x-ray department are often worried
radiological examinations (Scott, 2006).Waiting time in and confused about the possible outcome of their
radiology could be defined as the time between when a condition and this may even make it difficult for them to
patient present at the radiology department for an understand instruction and may even result to apparently
investigation, and the time the investigation is done and a aggressive attitude (Chesney et al., 1982). Consequent
report written on the outcome of the investigation. upon this is the need for a carefully thought out and
impeccably executed radiology services to the patients as
any mismanagement will spawn dissatisfaction with

www.ejbps.com 597
Ugwuanyi et al. European Journal of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences

services rendered, incessant complaints, the appearance Target population

of gross incompetence on the part of radiology staff, and The target population for this study will include
not infrequently, utter chaos. The successful application practicing radiographers and patients in Federal, State
of medical knowledge depends on what patients think and private radiology centers in Imo state.
and feel about the medical personnel and the hospital
(Cartwright, 1964). Sample size
A convenience sample of radiographers and patients was
Anecdotal evidence points to this fact and several chosen for the study. The sample was composed of only
authors have been equivocal on the negative relationship radiographers and patients available during the period of
between patient waiting time and satisfaction with data collection and who expressed willingness to
service delivery. Despite its impact, it is but one more participate in the study.
aspect of the factors that militate against patient
satisfaction with health care services. Time spent while Sampling technique
waiting for investigation is one aspect of healthcare that Non-probability convenience sampling was adopted for
patient value and prolonged waiting can be distressing the study.
(Anderson et al., 2007). Patients waiting time is often a
source of dissatisfaction and gives negative perception of Inclusion criteria for radiographers
the quality of patient care rendered. The perception i A radiographer practicing in major hospital and
imparts on both the radiology department and the diagnostic centers located in Imo state.
hospital in general (Rolando, 1993). ii Willingness of the Radiographer to participate in the
study.
All these impacts on the services rendered to the patient
by the department. The services rendered should be Exclusion criteria for radiographer
delivered by a system that are to provide care that is safe, i Hospital personnel who are not Radiographers.
effective, patient-centered, efficient, equitable and timely ii Student Radiographer.
(Wood, 2006). Various factors have been implicated iii Unwillingness to participate in the study.
such as paucity of radiology staff, little available
radiology equipment coping laboriously with the Inclusion criteria for patients
demands placed on them, and absence of seamless i Only stable, conscious and ambulant patients were
coordination between the various professionals in the included in the study.
department missing (Onwuzi, 2014). ii Patients that willing to participate in the study was
chosen for the study.
When the number of patient that present daily is
enormously larger without a corresponding increase in Exclusion criteria for patients
staff population and morale, waiting time is bound to be i Trauma/patients from the accident and emergency
longer as the number of staff will not be able to cope department were not used for the study
with the job. This causes stress to the staff and leads to ii Pediatric patients were excluded from the study.
burnout (Sciacchitano et al., 2001). The length of waiting iii Unconscious patients were also not included in the
time may cause deterioration in patient’s condition and study.
in some cases; the effectiveness of the proposed iv Patient relatives were also not included in the study.
treatment may be reduced.
Data collection
Aim of the Study A prospective respondent who had satisfied the inclusion
To assess the main factors that are responsible for the criteria is approached for data collection. The research
duration a patient stays in the radiology department and instrument was a structured questionnaire of the Likert
the perception of radiographers to these factors. format. Two questionnaires were designed to seek the
view of the patient and radiographer respectively. The
Specific Objectives questionnaires designed were made up of two sections:
 To assess the factors affecting patient waiting time the first section, Section A describes the demographics of
in radiology departments in Imo state. the patient and radiographers respectively. The second
 To assess patients’ and radiographer’s perception of section, Section B surveyed the perspective of the patient
length of waiting time. and the radiographer on the waiting time in the radiology
 To identify the causes of long patient waiting time in department. These questionnaires were shared and
radiology centers in Imo state from patients’ and collected by the author to the respondents.
radiographer’s perspective.
RESULT
MATERIALS AND METHODS Patient’s perception
Research design Two hundred questionnaires was designed and
The study was a prospective cross-sectional survey distributed to patients that came to the department for
research. various diagnostic purposes. Out of the two hundred

www.ejbps.com 598
Ugwuanyi et al. European Journal of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences

questionnaires distributed, only 136 questionnaires were Table 2: Employment Status.

filled and returned giving a return rate of 68%. Frequency Percentage
Civil servant 49 36.3
The male respondents comprised 53.7% (n=73) of the Business 52 38.5
entire respondents while the female respondents made up Unemployed 34 25.2
46.3% (n=63) of the respondents. Total 135 100

Table 1: Respondents Gender. The first part of the questionnaire assessed the perception
Frequency Percentage of the patients to waiting time. Questions here were
Male 73 53.7 designed using the likert format of question designs.
Female 63 46.3 From the mean of their responses, the patients were
Total 136 100 undecided on whether they waited too long to be
41.5% (n=54) of the respondents were married, 52.3% attended in the department. Also, the respondents
(n=68) of the respondents were single while the rest disagreed that the distance to the department is too long.
comprising 6.2% (n=8) were divorced. They also agreed that they arrived late to the department.
It was noted from the mean of their responses that the
respondents were undecided on whether the volume of
patients they met when they arrived was much. They
were also undecided on whether the radiographers
attended to on the basis of first come first serve. The
respondents were found to be undecided on the waiting
time being long because of the size of the department
compared to patient’s throughput. They disagreed that
they came before the staff for their appointment. From
the mean responses of the respondents, it was observed
that they were undecided on whether it took long before
they were attended to by the staff available. They
Fig 1: Marital Status of the respondents. disagreed that the waiting time was long because they
noticed that the radiology staff was busy doing
21.3%(n=29) of the respondents were within the age something else which increased the time they waited in
range of 18-24 years, 25%(n=34) were within the age the department. Also from the mean of their responses,
range of 25-30 years,22.8%(n=31) were within the age they disagreed that the waiting time was long because
range of 30-34 years, 14%(n=19) of the respondents they noticed that the staff do not want to work. They
were within the age range of 35-40 years while the rest disagreed also that the waiting time was long because of
comprising 16.9%(n=23) of the respondents were within power failure in the department. They also disagreed that
the age range of 40-45 years. the waiting time was long because of the breakdown in
the functioning capacity of the equipment in the
department.

The respondents disagreed that they spent less time in the

department and finally, they were undecided on whether
they were satisfied with the services rendered in the
department.

Table 3: Patient’s perception to waiting time.

Standard
Test Criteria Mean
Deviation
Waited too long 3.06 1.29
Distance to the department long 2.82 1.16
Arrived late 4.10 0.45
Volume of patient was much 3.52 1.37
First come first serve 3.20 1.17
Department small compared to patient
3.06 1.17
throughput
Came before staff 2.50 1.01
Fig. 2: Respondents age. Took long before I was attended 3.25 1.22
Respondents comprising 36.3% (n=49) of the whole Staff were busy with something else 2.70 1.03
respondents were civil servants, 38.5% (n=52) were Staffs do not want to work 2.44 0.45
business men, while respondents comprising 25.2% Power failure 2.48 0.93
(n=34) were unemployed. Equipment breakdown 2.59 0.98
Spent less time 2.84 1.29
Satisfied with the services rendered 3.38 1.17

www.ejbps.com 599
Ugwuanyi et al. European Journal of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences

Radiographers Perception to Waiting Time

A total of fifty questionnaires were printed and
distributed to radiographers. Out of these fifty
questionnaires, only 46 questionnaires were filled and
returned giving a return rate of 92%.

The male respondents that participated in this study

comprised 43.5% (n=20) of the respondents while the
female respondents made up of 56.5% (n=26) of the
respondents.

Table 4: Radiographers gender.

Frequency Percentage
Male 20 43.5
Female 26 56.5
Total 46 100 Fig. 4: Radiographers years of experience.
87% (n=40) of the respondents had B.sc as their highest
educational qualification, while the rest comprising 13% The second part of the questionnaire was designed in
(n=6) of the respondents had M.sc as their highest likert format to determine the perception of
academic qualification. radiographers to waiting time in the department.

Table 5: Academic qualification of the respondents. From the mean of their responses, the respondents
Frequency Percentage indicated that they were undecided on whether the
B.sc 40 87 patients waited too long in the department. They were
M.sc 6 13 also undecided on whether the patients arrived late to the
Total 46 100 department. They were also undecided that due to
78.3% (n=36) of the respondents were within the age complicated cases in the department, the patients wait
range of 20-29 years, 13% (n=6) were within the age time was extended. They however agreed that longer
range of 30-39 years while the rest comprising wait time is to be expected when there are complicated
8.7%(n=4) of the whole respondents were within the age cases to handle. The respondents were however
range of 40-49 years. undecided on whether the patients that came to the
department were attended to on the basis of first come
first serve. They were also undecided on the patient
waiting time being long due to the size of the department
compared to patients’ throughput. They however agreed
that lack of staff contributed to longer wait time of
patient. Also, they agreed that faulty equipment has an
influence in the longer wait time of patients in the
department. The respondents were undecided on whether
staff satisfaction influenced the patients wait time.
However, they agreed that restriction of radiographers to
report on images influenced patients wait time. They also
agreed that lack of role extension by the radiographers
influenced patients wait time. Also, they also agreed that
the longer time taken by the radiologist to report on
images influenced waiting time in the department.
Fig. 3: Age range of Radiographers.
The respondents from the mean value of their responses
Respondents comprising 34.8% (n=16) of the agreed that the lack of supporting staff in the department
respondents had worked as radiographer below 2 years also influence waiting time. However, they were
and 2-5 years respectively. 26.1% (n=12) had worked as undecided on lack of auxiliary staff contributing to
radiographers for 5-10 years while the rest comprising longer wait time. Finally, the respondents were
4.3% (n=2) had worked as radiographers for a period of undecided on whether the patients wait long in the
10-15 years. department.

www.ejbps.com 600
Ugwuanyi et al. European Journal of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences

Table 6: Radiographers perception of waiting time. services rendered. It is the duty of the radiology
Standard department to provide satisfactory services to its patients
Test Criteria Mean
Deviation as they present. Allen (1981) recommended that supply
Patient wait long 3.17 0.97 of recent magazines and newspapers, suitable for
Patient arrive late 3.13 0.96 different rates and age groups, pictures and toys for
Complicated cases 3.35 0.97 children, music, aquarium and flowers well help in
Special investigation 4.00 1.19 engaging the interest of the patients while they wait. The
First come first serve 3.48 1.19 patient indicated to not being early to the department as a
Department small compared cause of long waiting time. The overall impression
3.13 1.44 indicated that the patient were really satisfied or
to patients throughput
Lack of staff 4.07 1.13 dissatisfied with the service.
Faulty equipment 4.13 1.32
Radiology staff satisfaction 3.39 1.11 CONCLUSION
The patient waiting time in the department has been
Restriction of radiographers
4.83 1.29 implicated to be the leading cause of patient’s
to report images
satisfaction in the department.
Lack of role extension 4.00 1.31
Time taken by radiologists to
4.96 1.28 From this study, it was observed that the patient was
report images indifferent in their level of satisfaction in the department.
Lack of supporting staff 4.57 1.07 This cruel imply that there are either satisfied or not
Lack of auxiliary workers 3.22 1.49 satisfied with the service provides in the department.
Patients do not wait long 3.00 1.15
Also, the radiographer identified some factors that can
DISCUSSION influence want time , which include lack of staff, faculty
Patient waiting time has been attributed to be identified equipment, lack of role extension, restriction of
through the cause and effect, Mohammed (2005) found radiographers in certain fields in the department etc. it
that four major elements influenced waiting time. This only when these inefficiencies are addressed that the
includes availability of facilities and equipment, human patient satisfaction will be met.
resources, patients and registration process.
REFERENCES
Radiographer that practiced in this study indicated that 1. Alien WMC Patient waiting time BJR, 1981; 81-82.
lack of staff and faculty equipment leads to increased 2. Anderson, R.T. Fabian, T.C.; Rajesh, B. (2007).
patient waiting time in the department. This agreed with Willing to wait? The influence of patient waiting
the work done by Mohammed (2005) who conducted a time on satisfaction with primary care. Accessed on
study on waiting time in outpatient clinic. Here he 18th February, 2012. from
indicated availability of equipment and facilities and also http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/7/31.
human resources as the lead course of prolonged wait 3. Anderson, R.T., Camacho, F., Safrit, A., Jones, A.S.,
time in the department. Hoffmann, P. The relationship between patients
perceived waiting time and office-based practice
The patient here anteceded on the volume of patient satisfaction. NC Medical journal, 2007; 67(6): 409-
affecting the wait time. This agreed with the work by 413.
Digiacons and Kramer (1982), who investigated the 4. Booth A.J, Harrison, C.J.; Gardener G.J., Gray A.J.
relationship between daily patient cause, patient minimal Waiting times and patient satisfaction in the accident
rate and mean patient waiting. They found that there was emergency department. Archives of emergency
no significant correlation between waiting time and medicine, 1992; (9): 162-168.
patient volume. They speculated that patient had to wait 5. Cartwright, A. Human relations and hospital care,
longer on baby days but no relationship has observed London: Rouledge and Kegan Paul Limited, 1964;
when spearman’s RHO was used to check for 11.
relationship. However in a more recent work they did 6. Chesney D.N and Chesney M.O. Care of patient in
decor a significant circulation between median waiting radio-diagnostic radiography. Oxford: Blackwell
time to see a physician and patient volume per shift. scientific publications, 1982; 21-69.
7. Digiacomo, E.V. & Kramer, L.D. A study of
Other factors here figured to influencing waiting time in emergency unitwaiting time, Quality Review
the department. The radiographers indicated that lack of Bulletin, 1982; 8: 10-13.
role extension, restriction of radiographers to report on 8. Mohamad H.A. Study on outpatients, waiting time
images etc. This has affected the wait time as the period in hospital university Kebangassn Malaysia
of collection of result has now been extended. (HUKM) through the six sigma approach, Journal of
statistics, 2005; 7(5): 40-43.
The perception of satisfaction with services rendered 9. Rolando, C. (1993). An analysis of patient waiting
shows that majority of the patients were indifferent to the time in the emergency room. Georgia, Accessed

www.ejbps.com 601
Ugwuanyi et al. European Journal of Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Sciences

from www.ditic.mil/cgi-bin/GeTRDoc on 30th

March, 2015.
10. Sciacchitano, M, Goldstein, B.M, Diplacido, J.
(2001). Stress, burnout and hardiness in R.T.s.
Acessedon the 18th of March, 2012 from http:/find
articles.com/p/articles/mi_hb33387/is_4_72/is-n-
2883400.
11. Scott, E.B. (2006).Advantages of hiring a radiologist
assistant, Accessed on the 6th of March, 2012. form
http://www.find articles. Com/p/articles/mi-
hb3387/is-1-78/is-n-29296551/
12. Wood, N,Sitizia, J. Review issues and concepts.
ScoSci Med, 1997; 451829-1843.1843.

www.ejbps.com 602

View publication stats