Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

ACC 2024 Congress

Catch up on all the top stories and latest evidence in cardiology research with our ACC 2024 Congress hub page.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Health Services Research
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

Healthcare system responsiveness in Jiangsu Province, China

Authors: Jianqian Chao, Boyang Lu, Hua Zhang, Liguo Zhu, Hui Jin, Pei Liu

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The perceived responsiveness of a healthcare system reflects its ability to satisfy reasonable expectations of the public with respect to non-medical services. Recently, there has been increasing attention paid to responsiveness in evaluating the performance of a healthcare system in a variety of service settings. However, the factors that affect the responsiveness have been inconclusive so far and measures of improved responsiveness have not always thoroughly considered the factors. The aim of this study was to evaluate both the responsiveness of the healthcare system in Jiangsu Province, China, the factors that influence responsiveness and the measures of improved responsiveness considering it, as determined by a responsiveness survey.

Methods

A multistage, stratified random sampling method was used to select 1938 adult residents of Jiangsu Province in 2011. Face-to-face interviews were conducted using a self-designed questionnaire modeled on the World Health Organization proposal. The final analysis was based on 1783 (92%) valid questionnaires. Canonical correlation analysis was used to assess the factors that affect responsiveness.

Results

The average score of all responsiveness-related domains in the surveyed healthcare system was satisfactory (7.50 out of a maximum 10.0). The two highest scoring domains were dignity and confidentiality, and the two lowest scoring domains choice and prompt attention. The factors affecting responsiveness were age, regional economic development level, and geographic area (urban vs. rural). The responsiveness regarding basic amenities was rated worse by the elderly than by younger respondents. Responsiveness ranked better by those with a poorer economic status. Choice in cities was better than in rural regions.

Conclusions

The responsiveness of the Jiangsu healthcare system was considered to be satisfactory but could be improved by offering greater choice and providing more prompt attention. Perceptions of healthcare system responsiveness differ with age, regional economic development level, and geographic area (urban vs. rural). Measures to increase the perceived level of responsiveness include better service at higher level hospitals, shorter waiting time, more hospitals in rural regions, an improved medical environment, and provision of infrastructures that makes the medical environments more comfortable.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2000: Health Systems Improving Performance. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2000.
2.
Murray CJL, Frenk JA. WHO framework for health system Performance assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1999 (Discussion Paper 6).
3.
Li SX, Qu JB, Wang XZ, Lv SL. The Concept and Measurement of Responsiveness of Health System. Chinese Health Economics. 2001;2(20):44–6.
4.
Wada K, Kakuma R, Hoshi K, Sato Y, Hasegawa T, Satoh T. Factors Associated With Preferences for Health System Goals in Japan: A Pilot Study of the World Health Survey. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2011;23(5):721–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
Pang LJ, Qing JM, Yang L, Liu JM, Wang XM, Li Y. Analysis to satisfaction and Health System Responsiveness of inhabitants in Cities and Countrysides in Xinjiang Province. Xinjiang Medical Journal. 2005;35(1):11–3.
7.
Valentine N, Prasad A, Rice N, Robone S, Chatterji S. Health Systems Responsiveness – A Measure of the Acceptability of Health Care Processes and Systems. In: Smith PC, Mossialos E, Leatherman S, editors. Performance Measurement for Health System Improvement: Experiences, Challenges and Prospects. London: WHO European Regional Office; 2009. p. 138–86.
8.
9.
Rice N, Robone S, Smith PC. Vignettes and health systems responsiveness in cross-country comparative analyses. J R Stat Soc Ser A. 2012;175(2):337–69.CrossRef
10.
Valentine NB, Silva AD, Murray CJL. Estimating Responsiveness Level and Distribution for 191 Countries: Methods and Results. (Discussion Paper 22). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2000.
11.
Coulter A, Jenkinson C. European patients’ views on the responsiveness of health systems and healthcare providers. Eur J Public Health. 2005;15(4):355–60.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Anderson G, Hussey P. Comparing Health System Performance in OECD Counties. Health Aff. 2001;20(3):219–32.CrossRef
13.
Mohammed S, Bermejo JL, Souares A, Sauerborn Rand Dong H. Assessing responsiveness of health care services within a health insurance scheme in Nigeria: users’ perspectives. BMC Health Serv Res. 2013;13:502.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Robone S, Rice N, Smith PC. Health systems’ responsiveness and its characteristics: a cross-country comparative analysis. Health Serv Res. 2011;46(6pt2):2079–100.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Jung HP, Baerveldt C, Olesen F, Grol R, Wensing M. Patient characteristics as predictors of primary health care preferences: a systematic literature analysis. Health Expect. 2003;6(2):160–e181.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
Sofaer S, Crofton C, Goldstein E, Hoy E, Crabb J. What do consumers want to know about the quality of care in hospitals? Health Serv Res. 2005;40(6p2):2018–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Peter PG, Jan JK, Herman JS, Ingrid E, Wienke B. What’s important in evaluating health care quality? An international comparison of user views. BMC Health Serv Res. 2005;5(1):16–24.CrossRef
18.
Lu F. Study of the Responsiveness of Health System in Anhui, MS thesis. Anhui: Medical college of Anhui, Health management college; 2004.
19.
Jiang Q. tudy on the Responsiveness of Health System in Shanghai, PhD thesis. Shanghai: Fudan University, Public health college; 2003.
20.
Li GH, Hu SL, Chen ZX, Wang BCH, Bo W, Yiping C. Analysis of the responsiveness of patients in Shanghai. Chinese Journal of Hospital Administration. 2002;18(5):312–6.
21.
Wang F. The study of inhabitant health and health system responsiveness in Zhengzhou. Zhengzhou: MS thesis, Zhengzhou University; 2006.
22.
Hatcher L. A step-by-step approach to using SAS ® System for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. Cary: SAS Institute, Inc.; 1994.
23.
Chen S, Lu YH, Xie PP, Shuo CH, Youhui L, Pingpin X. Progress in the evaluation methods of health system responsiveness. Chinese Health Service Management. 2007;2:78–80.
24.
Goldwag R, Rosen B. Responsiveness of the health care system: findings from the Israeli component of the World Health Survey. Jerusalem: Myers-JDC-Broodale Institute; 2007.
25.
Silva AD, Valentine NB. Measuring responsiveness: Results of key informants survey in 35 countries. (Discussion Paper 21). Geneva: World Health Organization; 2000.
26.
Valentine NB, Ortiz JP, Tandon A, Kawabata K, Evans DB, Christopher JL, Murray CJ. Patient experiences with health services: population surveys from 16 OECD countries. In: Murray CJL, Evans DB, editors. Health systems performance assessment: debates, methods and empiricism. Geneva: WHO; 2003. p. 643–52.
27.
Valentine N, Darby C, Bonsel GJ. Which aspects of non-clinical quality of care most important? Results from WHO’s general population surveys of health responsiveness in 41 countries. Soc Sci Med. 2008;66:1939–50.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Gakidou E, Murray CJL, Evans DB. Health Systems Performance Assessment: Debates, Methods and Empiricism. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2003.
29.
Shi XZ, Xie J, Jia SS, Li YY, Yang JJ, Wang AY. Multiple fuzzy evaluating model of health system responsiveness in Henan Province. Chinese Journal of Health Statistics. 2002;19(4):99–101.
30.
Valentine NB, Bonsel GJ, Murray CJ. Measuring quality of health care from the user’s perspective in 41 countries: psychometric properties of WHO’s questions on health systems responsiveness. Qual Life Res. 2007;16(7):1107–25.CrossRefPubMed
31.
32.
Hsu CC, Chen L, Hu YW, Yip W, Shu CC. The dimensions of responsiveness of a health system: a Taiwanese perspective. BMC Public Health. 2006;17(6):72.CrossRef
33.
Jiang Q, Hu SLH. Some Questions on the Equity Assessment of Health System Performance in the World Health Report 2000. Chinese Health Service Management. 2002;6(8):17–9.
Metadata
Title
Healthcare system responsiveness in Jiangsu Province, China
Authors
Jianqian Chao
Boyang Lu
Hua Zhang
Liguo Zhu
Hui Jin
Pei Liu
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-017-1980-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Health Services Research 1/2017 Go to the issue

Debate

Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 10: operationalising disinvestment in a conceptual framework for resource allocation

Research article

Training nurses in task-shifting strategies for the management and control of hypertension in Ghana: a mixed-methods study

Research article

Patient perspectives on continuity of care: adaption and preliminary psychometric assessment of a Norwegian version of the Nijmegen Continuity Questionnaire (NCQ-N)

Research Article

Is the timing of radiological intervention and treatment day associated with economic outcomes in DRG-financed health care systems: a case study

Research article

Early postnatal care use by postpartum mothers in Mundri East County, South Sudan

Research article

Hospital choice in Germany from the patient’s perspective: a cross-sectional study