The Importance-Performance Analysis of the Quality of Services Provided for Patients in Hospitals Affiliated to Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Science

Zahra Ghorbani; Farzad Faraji-Khiavi; Effat Jahanbani; Behnaz Dindamal

doi:10.18502/htaa.v5i1.7377

Zahra Ghorbani Student Research Committee, Ahvaz Jundishapur University Of Health Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
Farzad Faraji-Khiavi Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
Effat Jahanbani Department of Health Services Management, School of Health, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran
Behnaz Dindamal Department of Health Services Management, School of Health, Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Ahvaz, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/htaa.v5i1.7377

Abstract

Background: Quality is a key factor in the distinction of services, and it is a potential source of sustainable competitive advantage to increase productiveness and patient satisfaction. The identification of strengths and weaknesses in quality of provided services can help to recognize priorities and develop improvement strategies.

Objectives: Using importance-performance analysis (IPA) method, this study aimed to evaluate the quality of services provided in hospitals affiliated to Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences, Iran.

Methods: Using stratified random sampling, this descriptive-analytical and cross-sectional study included 307 patients admitted to five Educational Hospitals affiliated to Ahvaz Jundishapur University of Medical Sciences in 2016. Data collection tool was a standard questionnaire proposed by Tomes & Chee Peng Ng (1995), which included demographic information and questions regarding the quality of services provided in seven factors. In addition to IPA, data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA), Pearson’s correlation, and chi squared test in SPSS software version 21.

Results: Total scores of quality factors were estimated as “important” in our research. In quality performance, “food”, “physical environment” and “dignity” factors were estimated as “relatively inappropriate” by mean scores of 2.50 ± 0.95, 2.90 ± 0.97 and 2.94 ± 1.05, respectively. These three factors were located in the second region of the IPA matrix. While the other four factors, including “empathy”, “relationship of mutual respect”, “understanding of illness” and “religious needs,” with mean scores higher than 3 were estimated as “appropriate” and located in the first region of this matrix. In all quality factors, scores of performance were lower than importance, and the gap between importance and performance in these seven factors ranged from 0.82 to 1.52. There was a significant relationship between age and education of respondents with the quality of services.

Conclusions: Given that the largest gap was related to the tangible dimensions of quality (including food and physical environment) and in order to improve the quality of services and competitive position, hospital managers must consider tangible dimension as a priority. Keywords: Quality of Services; Importance-Performance Analysis; Hospital; Hospital Services.