Health System Responsiveness: A Case Study of General Hospitals in Iran

Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Health Sciences Research Center, Department of Health and Management, School of Health, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

2 School of Health and Paramedical, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran

3 Student Research Committee, School of Health, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

4 Student Research Committee, Health Management and Economic Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

5 Department of Health Services Management, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Background
Considering patients’ needs and expectations in the process of healthcare delivery improves the quality of services. This study aimed to investigate the responsiveness of general public and private hospitals in Mashhad, Iran.
 
Methods
In this cross-sectional and explanatory study, hospitalized patients (with at least 2 days of stay) in general private and public hospitals in Mashhad were investigated. In total 425 patients (259 from private and 166 from public hospitals) were selected using a stratified and simple random sampling. Standard responsiveness questionnaire was used as the data collection tool. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics, independent t-tests and ANOVA by SPSS 16 at a significance level of 0.05.
 
Results
Access to the social support during hospitalization as well as confidentiality of the patient’s information achieved the highest score (3.21±0.73) while the patient participation in decision-making process of treatment received the least score (2.34±1.24). Among the research population 1.6%, 4.1%, 17.6%, 63.3% and 13.2% commented on the responsiveness level as very low, low, moderate, good, and excellent, respectively. There was no significant difference between the overall responsiveness scores of public and private hospitals ( P ≥0.05).
 
Conclusion
The hospitals have enough potential to improve various aspects of their responsiveness. We suggest a number of measures can help improve the non-clinical aspects of care. These include: using educational courses to improve the knowledge and attitudes of medical and nonmedical staff, changing the resource allocation method, and using quality tools such as reengineering to modify the healthcare delivery processes.

Keywords

Main Subjects


1. Oberst MT. Methodology in behavioral and psychosocial cancer research. Patients’ perceptions of care. Measurement of quality and satisfaction. Cancer 1984; 53: 2366-75.

2. Thomas LH, Bond S. Measuring patients’ satisfaction with nursing: 1990-1994. J Adv Nurs 1996; 23: 747-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.1996.tb00047.x

3. Ware JE Jr. What information do consumers want and how will they use it? Med Care 1995; 33: JS25-30.

4. Coulter A, Jenkinson C. European patients’ views on the responsiveness of health systems and healthcare providers. Eur J Public Health 2005; 15: 355-60. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/cki004

5. Hsu CC, Chen L, Hu YW, Yip W, Shu CC. The dimensions of responsiveness of a health system: a Taiwanese perspective. BMC Public Health 2006; 6: 72.

6. Rice N, Robone S, Smith PC. The measurement and comparison of health system responsiveness. Centre for Health Economics, University of York; 2008.

7. WHO. The World health report 2000: health systems: improving performance. Geneva: World health organization; 2000.

8. Rashidian A, Kavosi Z, Majdzadeh R. Assessing Health System Responsiveness: A Household Survey in 17th District of Tehran.Iran Red Crescent Medical Journal 2011; 13: 302-8.

9. Valentine N, Darby C, Bonsel GJ. Which aspects of non-clinical quality of care are most important? Results from WHO’s general population surveys of “health systems responsiveness” in 41 countries. Soc Sci Med 2008; 66: 1939-50. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.12.002

10. Kowal P, Naidoo N, Williams SR, Chatterji S. Performance of the health system in China and Asia as measured by responsiveness. J Health 2011; 3: 638-47.

11. Naseer M, Zahidie A, Shaikh BT. Determinants of patient’s satisfaction with health care system in Pakistan: A critical review. Pakistan J Public Health 2012; 2: 56-61.

12. Malhotra C, Do YK. Socio-economic disparities in health system responsiveness in India.Health policy plan 2013; 28: 197-205. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czs051

13. Letkovicova H, Prasad A, Valentine N. The health systems analytical guidelines for survey in the multi-country survey study. Switzerland: World heath organization; 2005.

14. Gostin L, Hodge JVN, Nygren-Krug H. The Domains of Health Responsiveness -A Human Rights Analysis. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002.

15. Third and fourth development plans [Online]. [database on the Internet]. 2010. Available from: http://hamahangi.behdasht.gov.ir/index.aspx?siteid=126&pageid=955/.

16. Javadi M, Karimi S, Raiesi A. Comparison of patients’ and nurses’ viewpoints about responsiveness among a sample from public and private hospitals of Isfahan.Iran Journal of Nurse and Midwifery Research 2011; 16: 273-7.

17. Peltzer K. Patient experiences and health system responsiveness in South Africa. BMC Health Serv Res 2009; 9: 117. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-9-117

18. Liabsuetrakul T, Petmanee P, Sanguanchua S, Oumudee N. Health system responsiveness for delivery care in Southern Thailand. Int J Qual Health Care 2012; 24: 169-75. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzr085

19. Ugurluoglu O, Celik Y. How responsive Turkish health care system is to its citizens: the views of hospital managers. J Med Syst 2006; 30: 421-8. doi: 10.1007/s10916-005-9006-8

20. Whitehead J, Wheeler H. Patients’ experiences of privacy and dignity. Part 1: a literature review. Br J Nurs 2008; 17: 381-5.

21. Lin YP, Tsai YF, Chen HF. Dignity in care in the hospital setting from patients’ perspectives in Taiwan: a descriptive qualitative study. J Clin Nurs 2011; 20: 794-801. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03499.x

22. Dickert NW, Kass NE. Understanding respect: learning from patients. J Med Ethics 2009; 35: 419-23. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.027235

23. Habibullah S. Responsiveness of the Federal Health System to the Needs of 18-45 Year Old Adults with Physical Disabilities in Islamabad, Pakistan. Graduate School Theses and Dissertations. University of South Florida; 2012. Available from: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/4059.

24. Ristea A-L, Stegaroiu I, Dinu V. Responsiveness of Health Systems: a Barometer of the Quality of Health Services. Quality Management in Services 2009; 6: 277-88.