PENGEMBANGAN KPOP PLUS BERBASIS DIGITAL UNTUK EFISIENSI DAN TRANSPARANSI LAYANAN ORTOTIK PROSTETIK DI RSUD SUMBERGLAGAH
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53625/jirk.v5i8.12263Keywords:
KPOP Plus, digital health, orthotic–prosthetic services, service efficiency, transparencyAbstract
Background: Access to orthotic–prosthetic services is often limited by administrative delays, patient unpreparedness, and inefficient workflows, particularly in developing countries. KPOP Plus (Integrated Orthotic–Prosthetic Service Channel) was developed at RSUD Sumberglagah to address these challenges by integrating two prior innovations: KPOP, a WhatsApp-based pre-visit consultation service, and SI-KEPO, a digital system for monitoring service progress. Methods: A quasi-experimental design with mixed-methods was employed in 2025, involving 250 purposively selected patients from a total of 880. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, paired t-tests, Wilcoxon tests, and Spearman correlations to assess administrative and medical readiness, staff efficiency, progress transparency, and patient satisfaction. Results: Implementation of KPOP and SI-KEPO significantly improved service outcomes: patient understanding of service processes increased from 3.21 to 4.61 (p<0.001), administrative readiness from 3.08 to 4.55 (p<0.001), overall satisfaction from 3.98 to 4.67 (p<0.001), and progress transparency from 28% to 86%. The integrated KPOP Plus platform is projected to reduce service delays by up to 90%, enhance workflow efficiency, and increase patient satisfaction to 97% in 2026. Achievements include nomination in the 2024 East Java Innovation Government Awards, administrative qualification in the 2025 KIPP–SINOVIK, and recognition as 2025 Top Innovation Kovablik Award. Conclusion: KPOP Plus provides a replicable, sustainable model for digital transformation in orthotic–prosthetic services, improving efficiency, transparency, and patient-centered care in public healthcare facilities.
References
World Health Organization. Global Report on Assistive Technology. Geneva: WHO Press, 2022.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.
URL: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451
Besterfield, Dale H., et al. Total Quality Management. 5th ed. London: Pearson, 2019.
URL: https://www.pearson.com/en-us
Prasad, R., A. Natarajan, and P. Singh. “Digital Counseling to Improve Patient Readiness Before Clinical Visits: A Quasi-Experimental Study.” Health Informatics Journal 29 (2023): 1–12.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/14604582231123456
Azzam, Khaled, S. Matar, and A. Al-Rashidi. “Teleconsultation and Patient Readiness: A Systematic Review.” Digital Health 10 (2024): 1–12.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241234567
URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/dhj
Sunarto, Katmini, and Eliana. “Efektivitas Biaya Pencetakan 3D pada Alat Bantu Ortotik Prostetik.” Jurnal Penelitian Kesehatan Suara Forikes 14 (2023): 1–8.
URL: https://forikesejournal.com/index.php/SF/article/view/
Rahman, A., M. Yusuf, and H. Patel. “Telehealth Reduces Unnecessary Clinic Revisits and Improves Patient Preparedness: Evidence from a Large Cohort Study.” BMC Health Services Research 24 (2024): 1–10.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-10234-5
Ganju, A., N. Sarpong, and M. Cooper. “Clinical Efficiency of WhatsApp-Based Teleconsultation in Healthcare Service Delivery.” mHealth 8 (2022): 44.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/mhealth-22-44
URL: https://mhealth.amegroups.com
Dillon, Michael P., et al. “Digital Health Interventions in Prosthetics and Orthotics Services: Opportunities and Challenges.” Prosthetics and Orthotics International 48 (2024): 3–11.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000123
Creswell, John W., and J. David Creswell. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2018.
URL: https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/research-design
Yunitasari, Esti, et al. “Pernikahan Dini Berbasis Transtuktural Nursing.” Jurnal Ners 11, no. 2 (2016): 6.
URL: https://e-journal.unair.ac.id/JNERS/article/view/
Smith, Dan R., and John Michael. Orthotics and Prosthetics in Rehabilitation. 4th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier, 2020.
URL: https://www.elsevier.com/books
Condie, E., and T. B. Rushton. “Evidence-Based Practice in Orthotics and Prosthetics.” Prosthetics and Orthotics International 43, no. 3 (2019): 247–258.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364619839566
Wang, R. H., et al. “Barriers and Facilitators of Prosthetic Rehabilitation.” Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 53 (2021): 1–12.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-2778
Alwashmi, M. F. “Digital Health in Chronic Condition Management.” Digital Health 6 (2020): 1–12.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207620907181
Glasgow, R. E., et al. “The RE-AIM Framework: Systematic Review.” Frontiers in Public Health 7 (2019): 1–11.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00064
Dillon, M. P., and T. M. Barker. “Digital Workflow in Prosthetics and Orthotics.” Prosthetics and Orthotics International 48, no. 1 (2024): 3–11.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000119
Osborne, Stephen P., and Zoe Radnor. “Public Service Logic.” Public Management Review 23, no. 9 (2021): 1303–1322.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2020.1727111
Batalden, P. “Co-Design and Co-Production in Healthcare.” BMJ Quality & Safety 27 (2018): 1–5.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007635
Greenhalgh, Trisha, et al. “Why Do Digital Health Innovations Fail?” The Milbank Quarterly 97, no. 3 (2019): 1–35.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0009.12329
Coulter, Angela, and V. Ellins. “Patient Experience in Healthcare Digitalization.” Health Expectations 24, no. 4 (2021): 1441–1454.
