OBJECTIVE

2

To construct a pharmacy service quality evaluation system， identify weaknesses in the integrated development of pharmacy services， and provide a reference for the homogenized and high-quality development of pharmacy services in compact urban medical groups.

METHODS

2

Guided by the five core dimensions of the Servperf model， the Delphi method was used to screen and optimize items， and a tripartite pharmacy service quality evaluation system， covering clinicians， pharmacists， and patients， adapted to the characteristics of compact urban medical groups was constructed. A multicenter cross-sectional empirical investigation was conducted in six compact urban medical groups in Chongqing using the evaluation system.

RESULTS

2

Through two rounds of Delphi consultation with 12 experts， a tripartite pharmacy service quality evaluation system was successfully constructed， com

prising 5 dimensions and 78 items （24 for clinical pharmacists， 23 for clinical medical staff， and 31 for patients and family members）. The Cronbach’s α coefficients for all dimensions exceeded 0.81， and the KMO values all exceeded 0.7. A total of 1 339 valid questionnaires were collected， including 279 from clinical pharmacists， 727 from clinical medical staff， and 333 from patients and family members. The empirical investigation showed that the overall quality of regional basic pharmacy services was good， but significant inter-group differences existed in service perceptions among the three groups. The score differences across the five dimensions were all statistically significant among the three groups （all

P

＜0.001）. Except for the tangibles dimension， in which clinical medical staff scored significantly lower than clinical pharmacists and patients/family members， patients/family members scored significantly higher than clinical medical staff and clinical pharmacists in the other four dimensions （

P

＜0.05）. For the 78 items， expert expectations largely matched the perceptions of the three groups， with a mean difference of 0.08 points； only 13 items showed a difference exceeding 0.5 points， representing marked gap，with “participating in multidisciplinary team consultation and making effective recommendations” showing the largest difference of 0.94 points.

CONCLUSIONS

2

The physician‑ pharmacist‑patient tripartite evaluation system constructed in this study is scientific and reliable. Empirical investigation confirms that the basic pharmaceutical support services of the medical groups are well established， whereas the development of high‑level collaborative services has notable weaknesses， and marked heterogeneity exists in service perception among the three groups.