Author:
Teymori Ehsan,Tabatabaee Seyed Saeed,Akhlaghi Saeed,Delavarinejad Azam,Kokabisaghi Fatemeh
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Pandemics such as Corona are currently major health concerns worldwide. Health system responsiveness to the medical and non-medical needs of patients during pandemics is essential. This study aimed to examine hospitals’ responsiveness to Corona patients.
Methods
This descriptive and analytical research had a cross-sectional design. The study population included Corona patients discharged from 17 public hospitals of Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Iran, in the spring of 2021. WHO questionnaire for health system responsiveness was used to collect data. 413 patients participated in the study who were selected by random classified sampling. To analyze the data, descriptive statistics, including frequency, and deviation, and to examine the relationship between variables, Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests were used.
Results
In this study, one-third participants were in the age range of 31 to 40 (32.6%). The ability of 277 (70.5%) participants to pay treatment costs was very low, and low. 380 (96.7%) of the respondents had basic health insurance and 101 (25.7%) had supplementary insurance. In general, respondents evaluated the responsiveness of hospitals as 75.6. The highest score was related to confidentiality, and the lowest to prompt attention. There was no significant relationship between the total response score with demographic information.
Conclusion
The responsiveness of studied hospitals to Corona patients was adequate. However, there was dissatisfaction with the lack of timely treatment and medication. Moreover, the most important dimension of responsiveness was dignity. Healthcare providers need to pay attention to different aspects of responsiveness and improving the quality of and access to health services during pandemics and disasters.
Funder
Mashhad University of Medical Sciences
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference35 articles.
1. Unruh L, Allin S, Marchildon G, Burke S, Barry S, Siersbaek R, Thomas S, Rajan S, Koval A, Alexander M, Merkur S. A comparison of 2020 health policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, Ireland, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. Health Policy. 2022 May 1;126(5):427 – 37.
2. Javadi M, Karimi S, Raiesi A, Yaghoubi M, Shams A, Kadkhodaie M. Organizational justice and responsiveness in selected private and public hospitals of Isfahan, Iran. J School Public Health Inst Public Health Res. 2012;9(4):11–20.
3. Silva AD. A framework for measuring responsiveness. Series of GPE Discussion Papers: n. 32. EIP/GPE/EBD. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
4. Maillet É, Mathieu L, Sicotte C. Modeling factors explaining the acceptance, actual use and satisfaction of nurses using an Electronic Patient Record in acute care settings: An extension of the UTAUT. International journal of medical informatics. 2015 Jan 1;84(1):36–47.
5. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2000 May 1;53(5):459 – 68.