Modern Care Journal
Sun, Aug 2, 2026
[Archive]
Volume 23, Issue 1 (1-2026)
|
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ghanbari A, Hatamizadeh N, Shahshahani S, Hosseinzadeh S. Healthcare centers’ responsiveness to people with disabilities; Ilam city- 2023. Mod Care J 2026; 23 (1) : e168356
URL: http://mcj.bums.ac.ir/article-1-616-en.html
URL: http://mcj.bums.ac.ir/article-1-616-en.html
1- Department of Rehabilitation Management, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Rehabilitation Management, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Email: nikta_h@yahoo.com
3- Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran & Department of Biostatistics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Rehabilitation Management, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Email: nikta_h@yahoo.com
3- Department of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran & Department of Biostatistics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (161 Views)
Introduction: Health-system responsiveness refers to the response of the health-system to legitimate expectations of people from the non-clinical aspects of health services. The present study assessed the responsiveness of primary, secondary and tertiary healthcare centers to people with disabilities.
Methods: A total number of 318 people with disabilities who received outpatient and/or inpatient services within the last 6 and 12 months were asked to evaluate centers in this survey. The World Health Organization Standard Responsiveness Questionnaire is used for data collection and SPSS-v26 software used for data analysis.
Results: The mean total responsiveness score of the healthcare centers as a whole was 83.5±11.20. The responsiveness of primary healthcare centers (86.8±6.28) and tertiary (rehabilitation) health centers (86.1±11.49) were significantly better than those of secondary health centers (hospitals and outpatient clinics (80.8±11.86). The highest and lowest responsive domain scores were in “prompt attention” (92.1±11.90) and “autonomy” (75.8±21.09) domains. The most important domains of responsiveness based on the clients’ opinion were in the domains of “dignity” and “confidentiality” and the least important ones were “quality of basic amenities” and “having choices”.
Conclusions: Based on results of the present study, the responsiveness of health centers in Ilam city is satisfactory. However, there are still areas to improve responsiveness. It is suggested to emphasize improvement of responsiveness in domains that have had a weaker performance and of most importance from the points of view of people with disabilities, along with strengthening the domains of responsiveness that have been in good condition.
Methods: A total number of 318 people with disabilities who received outpatient and/or inpatient services within the last 6 and 12 months were asked to evaluate centers in this survey. The World Health Organization Standard Responsiveness Questionnaire is used for data collection and SPSS-v26 software used for data analysis.
Results: The mean total responsiveness score of the healthcare centers as a whole was 83.5±11.20. The responsiveness of primary healthcare centers (86.8±6.28) and tertiary (rehabilitation) health centers (86.1±11.49) were significantly better than those of secondary health centers (hospitals and outpatient clinics (80.8±11.86). The highest and lowest responsive domain scores were in “prompt attention” (92.1±11.90) and “autonomy” (75.8±21.09) domains. The most important domains of responsiveness based on the clients’ opinion were in the domains of “dignity” and “confidentiality” and the least important ones were “quality of basic amenities” and “having choices”.
Conclusions: Based on results of the present study, the responsiveness of health centers in Ilam city is satisfactory. However, there are still areas to improve responsiveness. It is suggested to emphasize improvement of responsiveness in domains that have had a weaker performance and of most importance from the points of view of people with disabilities, along with strengthening the domains of responsiveness that have been in good condition.
Article number: e168356
Article Types: Research Article |
Subject:
General
Received: 2026/04/6 | Accepted: 2026/01/15 | Published: 2026/01/15
Received: 2026/04/6 | Accepted: 2026/01/15 | Published: 2026/01/15
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
