Managers’ Perspective toward Responsiveness in Non Clinical Services

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Health Management, School of Health, Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Qazvin, Iran

2 Department of Health Services Management, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran

3 Department of Statistics, School of Public Health, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Responsiveness is a measure of how well a healthcare organization performs in accordance with patients’ expectations and is a central factor to patient satisfaction. To enhance responsiveness in a health facility, the first step is to identify its current situation. This study was conducted to evaluate the responsiveness of a sample of hospitals in Yazd Province (Central Iran) as perceived by their managers.
Methods: Three hospitals of various types (one public, one private and one charity) were selected for survey, based on simple sampling. All hospital administrators, matrons, supervisors and head of the departments were asked to complete the study questionnaire. Based on an adapted version of WHO-proposed assessment model, responsiveness was measured in seven dimensions, including respect and dignity, informed choice, confidentiality, patient education and provider-patient communication, access to prompt services, quality of physical amenities and social support. The data were summarized by descriptive statistical methods.
Findings: A majority of respondents (37.9%) considered dignity and respect as the key responsiveness dimension. The mean score of responsiveness was found to be 2.27+0.39 in a public hospital, 2.02+0.35 in a private and 2.24+0.32 in a charity hospital. Respect and dignity scored the highest among responsiveness dimensions (2.35+0.44), followed by patient education (2.34+0.32), and quality of physical amenities (2.23+0.39). The lowest score was given to informed choice (1.73+0.34), followed by access to services (1.95+0.43), and confidentiality (1.99+0.27).
Conclusions: Responsiveness and all of its dimensions were scored at moderate. Responsiveness and all its dimensions were scored at moderate level by the hospital managers. One should notice that the scores may be even lower from the patients’ perspective. Thus, our study in line with previous ones conducted in Iran indicates a large room to improve responsiveness in the health facilities. Based on our data, informed choice, access to the services, and confidentiality are the prime domains for improvement. 

Keywords