Search results

In recent years, futures study methods, especially scenario analysis, are used to plan for disaster and emergency management. Scenario method is suitable for public level policy making. Scenarios generated alternative descriptive futures in all of the development field such as disaster studies. This paper aims to systematically review the articles that generated scenarios in disaster management to attain gaps, challenges and opportunities related to use of scenario analysis in disasters.

This is a systematic review that was conducted based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The keywords that searched included “disaster,” “emergency,” “crisis,” “disruptive event,” “futures study,” “foresight,” “scenario,” “community-based scenario planning,” “participatory scenario planning,” “scenario planning” and “scenario analysis.” The Google Scholar, ISI Web of Science, Science Direct, PubMed and Scopus databases were searched.

A total of 981 article gathered after initial search between electronic databases. At final step, only ten articles included in the study. The selected articles compared according to many aspects. Most of the scenarios that developed in disaster management and planning concentrated on climate change and flooding related hazards. Many of studies developed three or four scenarios that it seems the number is suitable for disaster planning.

The paper serves as an original guideline for disaster planning.

Although quality orientation is one of the main priorities of any progressive organization, quality evaluation in organizations providing services such as hospitals is one of the key challenges, because in this sector quality is determined by many intangible factors. Applying the service quality gap model is one of the common tools for quality evaluation in the service sector. This paper seeks to evaluate this issue.

The present descriptive study was carried out through a cross‐sectional method in 2008. The participants of this study were patients who had been referred to Kerman University of Medical Sciences hospitals. The sample comprised 385 patients, the data were collected by SERVQUAL as a standard questionnaire, and data analysis was carried out on 385 completed questionnaires.

In all five dimensions of quality, a gap was observed between patients' perceptions and expectations as follows: Assurance: −1.28, Empathy: −1.36, Responsiveness: −1.80, Tangibles: −1.86 and Reliability: −1.69. A paired T‐test showed that the differences between quality perceptions and expectations are significant (p value<0.05). Based on the findings of this research, the hospitals in the study did not meet the expectations of patients and were unable to provide health care services according to patients' expectations. Hence rearranging the service delivery and deploying better facilities and equipment in order to decrease the gap between patients' perceptions and expectations may be helpful.

The paper reports an original application of the SERVQUAL approach to hospital services of a developing country.

The purpose of this paper is to explore how the clinical governance policy and its main component, patient satisfaction, turned into practice and what they look like on the ground in the centralised health system of Iran.

A qualitative research stance was adopted incorporating three main sources of information: face to face in‐depth interviews and focus groups conducted with hospital senior managers at the teaching hospitals in Kerman city, Iran, as well as documentary analysis of key policy texts. Nine hospital senior managers were purposefully selected for face‐to‐face interviews as well as a purposeful sample of 15 hospital senior managers for focus groups.

The documentary analysis revealed how clinical policy has been put into practice. The interview and focus group data analysis also disclosed four key themes with respect to how policy implementers in the Iranian centralised health system perceive nationally developed policies towards clinical governance and patient satisfaction. These include: a paper exercise; opaque, ambiguous policies; unstable policies; and separation of policy making from policy implementation.

The study revealed a perceived mismatch between the official proposals for clinical governance and their application in practice. The findings of this research lend support to the idea that there should be no separation between policy making process and its implementation; they are inseparable and should be treated in parallel, rather than in sequence. The study further suggests more accountability of the state towards its policies and public alike as a better governance of the health system. State‐level sustainability followed by allocating proper resources to implementation fields and empowering policy implementers coupled with good systems of performance control are the keys to keep patient focus a top priority.