Table 2 Perceptions of service quality
From: Music festival drug checking: evaluation of an Australian pilot program
Number | Per cent | |
|---|---|---|
Overall rating of service (n = 128) | ||
Very poor | 0 | 0 |
Poor | 0 | 0 |
Average | 2 | 1.6 |
Good | 14 | 10.9 |
Very good | 112 | 87.5 |
Confidence with regard to the drug testing equipment (n = 140) | ||
Not at all confident | 0 | 0 |
Only slightly confident | 0 | 0 |
Somewhat confident | 11 | 7.9 |
Fairly confident | 36 | 25.7 |
Very confident | 93 | 66.4 |
Rating of information provided by drug checking staff (n = 129) | ||
Very poor | 0 | 0 |
Poor | 1 | .8 |
Average | 1 | .8 |
Good | 19 | 14.7 |
Very good | 108 | 83.7 |
Rating of information provided by brief intervention staff (n = 128) | ||
Very poor | 0 | 0 |
Poor | 0 | 0 |
Average | 4 | 3.1 |
Good | 16 | 12.5 |
Very good | 108 | 84.4 |
Overall clarity of information provided (by both drug checking and brief intervention) (n = 128) | ||
Very poor | 1 | .8 |
Poor | 0 | 0 |
Average | 3 | 2.3 |
Good | 14 | 10.9 |
Very good | 111 | 86.0 |