Effect of the Iranian hospital grading system on patients' and general practitioners' behaviour: An examination of awareness, belief and choice

Health Services Management Research

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 139-144

  Aryankhesal, Aidin ^a,b   Sheldon, Trevor ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b IRAN UNIVERSITY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES   (Iran)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONER; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HOSPITAL GRADING SYSTEM; HUMAN; IRAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT REFERRAL; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ADULT; ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; CHOICE BEHAVIOR; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; GENERAL PRACTITIONERS; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEALTH POLICY; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; IRAN; MALE; PATIENT PREFERENCE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY INDICATORS, HEALTH CARE; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 77956109373     PISSN: 09514848     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/hsmr.2009.009028     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Nutley S, Smith PC. League tables for performance improvement in health care. J Health Serv Res Policy 1998;3:50-7 (Pubitemid 28065964)
2. Marshall MN, Shekelle PG, Leatherman S, et al. The public release of performance data: what do we expect to gain? A review of the evidence. J Am Med Assoc 2000;283:1866-74
3. Shekelle PG, Lim Y, Mattke S, et al. Does Public Release of Performance Results Improve Quality of Care. A Systematic Review. London: The Health Foundation, 2008
4. Fung CH, Lim Y, Mattke S, et al. Systematic review: the evidence that publishing patient care performance data improves quality of care. Ann Inter Med 2008;148:111-23
5. Mennemeyer ST, Morrisey MA, Howard LZ. Death and reputation: how consumers acted upon HCFA mortality information. Inquiry 1997;34:117-28
6. Vladeck BC, Goodwin EJ, Myers LP, et al. Consumers and hospital use: the HCFA 'death list'. Health Affairs 1998;7:122-5
7. Mukamel DB, Mushlin AL. Quality of care information makes a difference: an analysis of market share and price changes after publication of the New York State Cardiac Surgery Mortality Reports. Med Care 1998;36:945-54
8. Hannan EL, Kumar D, Racz M, et al. New York state's cardiac surgery reporting system: four years later. Ann Thoracic Surg 1994;58:1852-57 (Pubitemid 24379027)
9. Chassin MR. Achieving and sustaining improved quality: lessons from New York state and cardiac surgery. Health Affairs 2002;21:40-51
10. Cutler DM, Huckman RS, Landrum MB. The role of information in medical markets: analysis of publicly reported outcomes in cardiac surgery. Am Econom Rev 2004;94:342-6
11. Jha AK, Epstein AM. The predictive accuracy of the New York state coronary artery bypass surgery report-card system. Health Affairs 2006;25:844-55
12. Baker DW, Einstadter D, Thomas C, et al. The effect of publicly reporting hospital performance on market share and risk-adjusted mortality at high-mortality hospitals. Med Care 2003;41:729-40
13. Romano PS, Zhou H. Do well-publicized risk-adjusted outcomes reports affect hospital volume? Med Care 2004;42:367-77
14. Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Tusler M. Hospital performance reports: impact on quality, market share, and reputation. Health Affairs 2005;24:1150-60
15. MOHME. The Guideline of Standards and Principles of Evaluation of the General Hospitals. Tehran: The Iranian Ministry of Health and Medical Education, 1997
16. Medical Services Insurance Organisation. Calculation of Co-payment in Private Sector. Tehran: Medical Services Insurance Organisation, 2008
17. Schneider EC, Epstein AM. Use of public performance reports: a survey of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. JAMA 1998;279:1638-42