Quality standards and its compatibility rating prioritizing: the viewpoint of providers and recipients of hospital services in Iran

• Main Authors: Rafat Mohebbifar, Fariba Zahedifar, Elnaz Ghanati, Mohammad Zakaria Kiaei, Omid Khosravizadeh
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2016-07-01
• Series: Journal of Health Management & Informatics
• Subjects: Quality; Standard; Hospital; Evaluation
• Online Access: http://jhmi.sums.ac.ir/index.php/JHMI/article/view/242/80

Introduction: Quality of health services is the rate of achievement to the most desirable resultants of health, so that provided services are effective, efficient, and affordable. Thus, quality evaluation can be an important source of information for recognition of problems and favorable plans in provision of treatment services. Method: In this cross-sectional study, criteria of quality in hospital services and the compatibility rate from viewpoint of providers and recipients of services in Iran were studied using simple random sampling method in 4 provinces of country among 1485 people. Data were gathered using a designed questionnaire; criteria of quality in views of providers and recipients of services in six dimensions were studied. The data were analyzed using SPSSW-20 software. In order to analyze the information, descriptive tests and to determine the compatibility rate between the two groups, Chi-square test were used at a significance level of 0.05. Results:Based on the results of this research, most percentage of accordance between the two groups of providers and recipients of services was in “Human Resources” dimension and in 1st priority (“Knowledge and specialty and skills of physicians and nurses and other people involved in patient care” criterion) with a frequency of 76.3 and 73.1 percent. Among the six studied dimensions, compatibility rate between the two groups, in “Access to Service and Care”, “Respecting Values and Emotional Support”, and “Management and Coordination of Care System” dimensions was significant (P<0.001). Conclusion: Quality evaluation is an important source of information for recognition of problems and favorable plans in provision of effective health services. Therefore, recognition of different views of beneficiary groups and specially attempts to make perceptions of providers and recipients closer in the context of quality criteria are essential.