Ethics code: IR.IAU.SRB.REC.1402.091
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Begdali A S, Riahi L, Hejazi S F, Nikravan A. Factors Affecting Patient Preferences and Uncertainty Intolerance in Private and Public Hospitals of Iran From the Perspective of Health Care Professionals. Qom Univ Med Sci J 2024; 18 : 3075.1
URL: http://journal.muq.ac.ir/article-1-3965-en.html
URL: http://journal.muq.ac.ir/article-1-3965-en.html
1- Department of Health Services Adminstration, Faculty of Medical Sciences and Technologies, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2- Department of Health Services Adminstration, Faculty of Medical Sciences and Technologies, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,dr.l.riahi@gmail.com
3- Department of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran.
2- Department of Health Services Adminstration, Faculty of Medical Sciences and Technologies, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran. ,
3- Department of Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Qom University of Medical Sciences, Qom, Iran.
Abstract: (367 Views)
Background and Objectives: Due to the important effect of physicians’ behaviors on healthcare quality, cost-effective measures are necessary to make appropriate decisions and improve patient acceptance of treatment. This study aims to investigate the factors affecting patients’ preferences and uncertainty intolerance in private and public hospitals of Iran from the perspective of healthcare professionals.
Methods: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study. Participants were 550 specialists, including managers and personnel of public and private hospitals in Iran, who were selected using a stratified sampling method. A researcher-made questionnaire was used to measure the factors affecting patient preferences, and the intolerance of uncertainty scale (IUS) was used to measure the factors affecting the patient’s tolerance of uncertainty.
Results: We identified six factors effective in patient preferences in two public and private medical centers. The most important factor in the public centers was the “insistence of patients and the type of patient insurance in choosing treatment options”. In the private centers, the most important factor was “allowing the patient to compare treatment options”. Regarding the factors affecting the tolerance of uncertainty, in the emotional dimension, the most important factor was “interest in making decisions in uncertain situations” in the public centers and “courage in making uncertain decisions” in the private centers. In the behavioral dimension, the most important factor was “search for making uncertain decisions” in the public centers and “attention to uncertain decisions” in the private centers. In the cognitive dimension, the most important factor was “certainty about the treatment procedures” in the governmental centers and “trust of the patient in the physician” in the private centers.
Conclusion: To increase patient satisfaction and the quality of health care services, attention should be paid to the identified factors affecting the patients’ preferences and tolerance of uncertainty in public and private medical centers in Iran.
Methods: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study. Participants were 550 specialists, including managers and personnel of public and private hospitals in Iran, who were selected using a stratified sampling method. A researcher-made questionnaire was used to measure the factors affecting patient preferences, and the intolerance of uncertainty scale (IUS) was used to measure the factors affecting the patient’s tolerance of uncertainty.
Results: We identified six factors effective in patient preferences in two public and private medical centers. The most important factor in the public centers was the “insistence of patients and the type of patient insurance in choosing treatment options”. In the private centers, the most important factor was “allowing the patient to compare treatment options”. Regarding the factors affecting the tolerance of uncertainty, in the emotional dimension, the most important factor was “interest in making decisions in uncertain situations” in the public centers and “courage in making uncertain decisions” in the private centers. In the behavioral dimension, the most important factor was “search for making uncertain decisions” in the public centers and “attention to uncertain decisions” in the private centers. In the cognitive dimension, the most important factor was “certainty about the treatment procedures” in the governmental centers and “trust of the patient in the physician” in the private centers.
Conclusion: To increase patient satisfaction and the quality of health care services, attention should be paid to the identified factors affecting the patients’ preferences and tolerance of uncertainty in public and private medical centers in Iran.
Article number: 3075.1
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
مدیریت بهداشتی
Received: 2024/06/13 | Accepted: 2024/08/3 | Published: 2024/04/29
Received: 2024/06/13 | Accepted: 2024/08/3 | Published: 2024/04/29
References
1. Sorenson C, Drummond M, Khan BB. Medical technology as a key driver of rising health expenditure: Disentangling the relationship. Clin Econ Outcomes Res. 2013; 5:223. [DOI:10.2147/CEOR.S39634] [DOI:10.2147/CEOR.S39634]
2. World Health Organization (WHO). Key components of a well functioning health system Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010. [Link]
3. Seyedin H, Afshari M, Isfahani P, Rakhshan A, Hasanzadeh E, Taherimirghaed M. Main factors leading to supplier-induced demand in Iran: A comprehensive review. Health Scope. 2020; 9(2):e96366. [DOI:10.5812/jhealthscope.96366] [DOI:10.5812/jhealthscope.96366]
4. Ringdal M, Chaboyer W, Ulin K, Bucknall T, Oxelmark L. Patient preferences for participation in patient care and safety activities in hospitals. BMC Nurs. 2017; 16:68. [DOI:10.1186/s12912-017-0266-7] [DOI:10.1186/s12912-017-0266-7]
5. Modes ME, Engelberg RA, Nielsen EL, Brumback LC, Neville TH, Walling AM, et al. Seriously ill patients' prioritized goals and their clinicians' perceptions of those goals. J Pain Sympt Manage. 2022; 64(4):410-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.06.004] [DOI:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.06.004]
6. Bakhnivskyi V, Furman F. [Physicians induced demand in the primary health care level (Polish)]. Wiad Lek. 2018; 71(7):1385-91. [PMID]
7. Iles RA. Informal healthcare sector and marginalized groups: Repeat visits in rural North India. Plos One. 2018; 13(7):e0199380. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0199380] [PMID] [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0199380]
8. Hillen MA, Gutheil CM, Strout TD, Smets EMA, Han PKJ. Tolerance of uncertainty: Conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare. Soc Sci Med. 2017; 180:62-75. [DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.024] [PMID] [DOI:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.024]
9. Karni E. A theory of medical decision making under uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain. 2009; 39:1-16. [DOI:10.1007/s11166-009-9071-3] [DOI:10.1007/s11166-009-9071-3]
10. Strout TD, Hillen M, Gutheil C, Anderson E, Hutchinson R, Ward H, et al. Tolerance of uncertainty: A systematic review of health and healthcare-related outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 2018; 101(9):1518-37. [DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2018.03.030] [DOI:10.1016/j.pec.2018.03.030]
11. Dhawale T, Steuten LM, Deeg HJ. Uncertainty of physicians and patients in medical decision making. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2017; 23(6):865-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.bbmt.2017.03.013] [DOI:10.1016/j.bbmt.2017.03.013]
12. Buhr K, Dugas MJ. The intolerance of uncertainty scale: Psychometric properties of the English version. Behav Res Ther. 2002; 40(8):931-45. [DOI:10.1016/S0005-7967(01)00092-4] [DOI:10.1016/S0005-7967(01)00092-4]
13. Gustafson A. Reducing patient uncertainty: Implementation of a shared decision-making process enhances treatment quality and provider communication. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2018 ; 21(1):113-5. [DOI:10.1188/17.CJON.113-115] [DOI:10.1188/17.CJON.113-115]
14. Heyland DK, Heyland R, Dodek P, You JJ, Sinuff T, Hiebert T, et al. Discordance between patients' stated values and treatment preferences for end-of-life care: Results of a multicentre survey. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2017; 7(3):292-9. [DOI:10.1136/bmjspcare-2015-001056] [DOI:10.1136/bmjspcare-2015-001056]
15. Fakhri S, Engelberg RA, Downey L, Nielsen EL, Paul S, Lahdya AZ, et al. Factors affecting patients' preferences for and actual discussions about end-of-life care. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016; 52(3):386-94. [DOI:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.03.012] [DOI:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.03.012]
16. Ghanavati S, Baradaran HR, Kamran Soltani Arabshahi S, Bigdeli S. Developing and validating of the clinical uncertainty measurement questionnaire (CUMQ) among practicing physicians and clinical residents in Iran. BMC Med Educ. 2022; 22(1):462. [DOI:10.1186/s12909-022-03444-1] [DOI:10.1186/s12909-022-03444-1]
17. Intezirian Ardakan S, Jam Bersang S, Jafari H, Bahrami A. Decision-making preferences and patients' perceived participation in care: a case study in Yazd teaching hospitals 1400:6(2)117-1323.
18. Hosseini S, Kraskian Mojambari A, Ferdosipour A. The five personality factors in tolerating ambiguity. J Thought Behav Clin Psychol. 2013; 8(30):17-26. [DOI:10.4236/jbbs.2016.69036] [DOI:10.4236/jbbs.2016.69036]
19. Cutler D, Skinner JS, Dora Stern A, Wennberg D. Physician beliefs and patient preferences: A new look at regional variation in health care spending. Am Econ J. 2019; 11(1):192-221. [DOI:10.1257/pol.20150421] [DOI:10.1257/pol.20150421]
20. Mackintosh N, Armstrong N. Understanding and managing uncertainty in health care: Revisiting and advancing sociological contributions. Soc Health Illn. 42(S1):1-20. [DOI:10.1111/1467-9566.13160] [DOI:10.1111/1467-9566.13160]
21. Dreger M. Exploring determinants and regional variation of diagnostic imaging utilization rates in German inpatient care. 2022; ZEFQ. 175:76-80. [DOI:10.1016/j.zefq.2022.09.004] [DOI:10.1016/j.zefq.2022.09.004]
22. Kornilova TV, Pavlova EM. Creativity and tolerance for uncertainty predict the engagement of emotional intelligence in personal decision making. Psychol Russ. 2013; 6(4):34-46. [DOI:10.11621/pir.2013.0403] [DOI:10.11621/pir.2013.0403]
23. Anderson EC, Carleton RN, Diefenbach M, Han PKJ. Front psychol. the relationship between uncertainty and affect. Front Psychol. 2019; 10:2504. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02504] [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02504]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Owned by Qom University of Medical Sciences
Published by Qom University of Medical Sciences Press
eISSN: 2008-1375
pISSN: 1735-7799
Email: journal[at]muq.ac.ir
j.mua.ac[at]gmail.com
