5.4.3 Section C: Perceptions of patients towards the
tangibility dimension of
the hospital 115
5.4.4 Section D: Overall perception of services
117
5.4.5 Section E: Factors that could influence the choice for
the military
hospital 119
5.5 ACCEPTANCE OR REJECTION OF HYPOHESES
121
5.6 MEASUREMENT OF THE OBJECTIVES 122
5.7 CONCLUSION 123
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS 125
6.1 INTRODUCTION 125
6.2 MAIN CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE STUDY 125
6.2.1 Perceptions of patients regarding the four service
quality dimensions
investigated in this study 126
6.3 PATIENTS' PERCEPTIONS REGARDING THE TANGIBLE ASPECTS
AT A SPECIFIC MILITARY HOSPITAL 131
6.4 OVERALL PERCEPTION OF SERVICES AND FACTORS THAT
COULD INFLUENCE THE CHOICE OF A MILITARY HOSPITAL
132
6.5 LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY 133
6.5.1 Limitations based on the literature review
133
6.5.2 Limitations of the empirical phase of study
134
6.6 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
134
6.7 CONCLUDING REMARKS 134
xi
REFERENCES 135
APPENDIX A: COVERING LETTER 150
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE 151
APPENDIX C: CONFIRMATION OF LANGUAGE EDITING
157
xii
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 2.1: Department of emergency 30
TABLE 2.2: Department of medical analysis 31
TABLE 2.3: A pharmacy 32
TABLE 2.4: Department of inernal mecicine 33
TABLE 2.5: Department of surgery and orthopaedic 33
TABLE 2.6: Department of ophthalmoloty 34
TABLE 2.7: Department of Ear, Nose and Throat (ENT) 34
TABLE 2.8: Department of radiology 35
TABLE 2.9: Military hospital 35
TABLE 3.1: Definition of services marketing 41
TABLE 3.2: Definition of service quality 55
TABLE 3.3: Definition of customer satisfaction 62
TABLE 4.1: Reliability statistics (Doctors and Nurses) 85
TABLE 4.2: Minimum sample size estimates 91
TABLE 5.1: Respondents' approaches and response rate 98
TABLE 5.2: Frequency of selected demographic variables of the
sample 99
TABLE 5.3: Frequency of the number of visits to the hospital and
duration of the visit 102
TABLE 5.4: Patients' perception of doctors' reliability 103
TABLE 5.5: Patients' perception of nurses' reliability 105
TABLE 5.6: Patients' perception of doctors' responsiveness 106
TABLE 5.7: Patients' perception of nurses' responsiveness 107
TABLE 5.8: Patients' perception of doctors' assurance 108
TABLE 5.9: Patients' perception of nurses' assurance 109
TABLE 5.10: Patients' perception of doctors' empathy 110
TABLE 5.11: Patients' perception of nurses' empathy 111
TABLE 5.12: Overall means scores, standard deviations and p-value
for the
reliability of doctors and nurses 113
TABLE 5.13: Overall
means scores, standard deviations and p-value for the
responsiveness of doctors and nurses 114
TABLE 5.14: Overall
means scores, standard deviations and p-values for the
assurance of doctors and nurses 114
TABLE 5.15: Overall
means scores, standard deviations and p-values for the
empathy of doctors and nurses 115
xiii
TABLE 5.16: Tangible aspects 116
TABLE 5.17: Overall means sc ores and standard deviations for
the tangibility
dimensions of service quality as rated by the respondents
117
TABLE 5.18: Overall perception of services 117
TABLE 5.19: Overall means score and standard deviation for the
overall perception
of service delivery as rated by the respondents 118
TABLE 5.20: Influential factors 119
xiv
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 3.1: The services marketing triangle 52
FIGURE 3.2: Service quality gap model 60
FIGURE 4.1: Stages in the research process 71
FIGURE 4.2: Target population, sample units, sample elements
and actual
sample size 86
1
CHAPTER 1 : CONTEXTUALISATION OF THE STUDY
| 
