Analysis of quality indexes of the provided health services in public and private services of Angola

Authors

  • Maria Teresa Conceição Vicente Ministério da Saúde de Angola/ Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP
  • Rodrigo Daminello Raimundo Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP/Faculdade de Saúde Pública da USP, São Paulo.
  • Ligia Ajaime Azalis Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Diadema, SP
  • Virginia Berlanga Campos Junqueira
  • Fernando Luiz Affonso Fonseca

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.119280

Keywords:

health management, quality of health care, health care evaluation.

Abstract

Introduction: Quality indices are being increasingly used by leaders, managers and health professionals as operational tools to improve processes and reduce costs. Noting that there is a greater tendency of private hospitals operating in the regulatory model for market mechanisms, it is expected that the quality indicators that serve as a reference for monitoring the health management are more critical in public hospitals. Objective: Evaluate the quality of health services provided in public and private service in Angola. Methods: We analyzed 142 patients of a public and a private institutions in Angola in a structured interview on health indicators. The indices were collected according to the process structure components and results. Results: There are 51,453 calls in the public institution, remaining hospitalized a day, an average of 184 patients,  with an annual rate of bed occupancy of 90.84%. 50% of respondents praised the services and 22% complained about the quality of services. He was appointed as the main grounds for complaint the slow service (17%). The private institution received 2,222 patients, with an average of 570 patients. The mean hospital stay was 4.5 days. The average monthly rate of bed occupancy was 59.9%. In assessing the degree of satisfaction of care, regular or bad satisfaction obtained a rate of 60% in the private institution. Conclusion: There was no favorable results for quality in health management both in public service and in private.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Diário da República de Angola. Decreto Lei nº 21-B/92 de 28 de Agosto. [cited 2016 Mar 03] Available from: http://www.audiconta-angola.com/?page_id=1017.

Diário da República de Angola, Decreto Lei nº 262/10, de 24 de Novembro. cited 2016 Mar 03] Available from: http://www.audiconta-angola.com/?page_id=1017.

Comitê Regional Africano. Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS). Revitalização dos sistemas de saúde no contexto dos cuidados primários de saúde na região africana, 2006. cited 2016 Mar 03] Available from: http://afrolib.afro.who.int/RC/RC%2056/Doc_Por/AFR%20RC56%2012.pdf.

Ministério da Administração do Território/Programa das Nações Unidas para o Desenvolvimento. Desconcentração e descentralização em Angola. v. II. Luanda: Ponto UM. Indústria Gráfica; 2007.

Fundo de População das Nações Unidas. Características gerais da população de Angola, 2006. [cited 2016 Mar 03] Available from: http://www.angola.unfpa.org/popang.htm.

Instituto Português de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento. Angola: cited 2016 Mar 03] Available from: http://www. ipad.mne.gov.pt/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=29&Itemid=60

Menezes S. Mamma Angola: sociedade e economia de um país nascente. São Paulo: Edusp; 2000.

Organização Mundial da Saúde. Estratégia da OMS de cooperação com os países: Angola, 2002-2005. [cited 2016 Mar 03] Available from: http://www.who.int/countryfocus/cooperation_strategy/countries/angola_2002_2005_portuguese.pdf.

rganização Mundial da Saúde (OMS). Avaliação dos programas de saúde: normas fundamentais para sua aplicação no processo de gestação para o desenvolvimento nacional na saúde. Genebra; 1981.

Norman AH. Qualidade em saúde. Rev Bras Med Família Comunidade. 2012;7(23):67-8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5712/rbmfc7(23)655

Donabedian A. Basic Approaches to assessment: Structure, Process, and Outcome. In: Avedis Donabedian, Explorations in quality assessment and monitoring vol. III. Ann Arbor MI: Health Administration Press; 1980; p.77-125.

Donabeian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966;44(3):166-206. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3348969

Hartz ZMA, Champagne F, Leal MC, Contandriopoulos AP. Mortalidade infantil “evitável” em duas cidades no nordeste do Brasil: indicador de qualidade do sistema local de saúde. Rev Saúde Pública. 1996;30(4):310-8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89101996000400004

Vaz JC. Avaliando a Gestão. cited 2016 Mar 03] Available from: http://polis.org.br/publicacoes/avaliandoa-gestao/.

Borba GS, Kliemann Neto FJ. Gestão hospitalar: identificação das práticas de aprendizagem existentes em hospitais. Saúde Soc. 2008;17(1):44-60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12902008000100005

Adami NP, Maranhão AMSA. Qualidade dos serviços de saúde: conceitos e métodos avaliativos. Acta Paul Enferm. 1995;8(4):47-55.

Berwick DM. Melhorando a qualidade dos serviços médicos, hospitalares e da saúde. São Paulo (SP): Makron Books; 1995.

Bosi MLM, Chimura KY. Avaliação qualitativa de programas de saúde: contribuições para propostas metodológicas centradas na integralidade e na humanização. In: Bosi MLM, Mercado FJ. Avaliação qualitativa de programas de saúde: enfoques emergentes. Petrópolis: Vozes; 2006. p. 87-117.

D’Innocenzo M, Adami NP, Cunha ICKO. O movimento pela qualidade nos serviços de saúde e enfermagem. Rev Bras Enferm. 2006;59(1):84-8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-71672006000100016

Porter ME. Competitive strategy: techniques for analysing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press; 1980.

Porter ME. Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining competitive performance. New York: Free Press; 1985.

Porter ME. The competitive advantage of nations. Harvard Business Review. 1990; p.73-93.

Mintzberg H. Generic strategies: toward acomprehensive framework. In: Shrivastava P. Advances in strategic management. V.5. Greenwich: Jay Press; 1988; p.1-67.

Donabedian A. Basic approaches to assessment: structure, process and outcome. In: Donabedian A. Explorations in Quality Assessment and Monitoring: the definition of quality and approaches to its assessment. Michingan: Health Administration Press; 1980; p. 77-125.

Bittar OJNV. Indicadores de qualidade e quantidade em saúde. Rev Adm Saúde. 2001; 3(12): 21-8.

Bittar OJNV. Indicadores de qualidade e quantidade em saúde. Parte II. Rev Adm Saúde 2004; 6(22):15-8.

Riveira FJU, Artemann E. Planejamento e gestão em saúde: histórico e tendências com base numa visão comunicativa. Ciênc Saúde Coletiva. 2010;15(5):2265-74. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-81232010000500002

Downloads

Published

2016-08-29

Issue

Vol. 26 No. 2 (2016)

Section

Artigos Originais

License

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis