IMPROVING SERVICE QUALITY IN TURKISH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM: THE ROLE OF MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 2, 92 - 107, 07.07.2015

Mehmet Şahin Gök

https://doi.org/10.18825/iremjournal.109063

Öz

This study aims to examine the role of medical technology for improving service quality. For this purpose we empirically analyze the relationship between the efficiency of medical technology  and perceived service quality in Turkish healthcare services.  Accordingly, inefficiency causes of medical technology are also  discussed in this study. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) is  applied to analyze the medical technology-based efficiencies of  teaching hospitals in Turkey for the study years from 2008 to  2010. Data concerning 40 teaching hospitals are obtained from Annual Statistical Health Report and Turkish Ministry of Health  (TMoH). This explanatory study provides the evidence that teaching hospitals might be able to improve both quality and efficiency of their services by effective utilization of existing  medical technology. We find that efficient hospitals also provide high quality services compared to their inefficient counterparts.  According to these results, hospital administrators could improve perceived service quality by increasing the efficiencies of their  existing medical technology. This study also suggests practical  implications for the reallocation of medical devices in order to  meet patient demand. Policy makers should focus on monitoring the effective utilization of existing medical capacity. This study contributes to the field of healthcare management research by applying the DEA model to the relationship between medical technology and service quality. Furthermore, this study provides several significant findings regarding inefficiency causes of medical technology and suggestions for quality improvements.

Anahtar Kelimeler

medical technology; service quality; inefficiency; data envelopment analysis; teaching hospitals

IMPROVING SERVICE QUALITY IN TURKISH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM: THE ROLE OF MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY

Öz

-

Anahtar Kelimeler

-

Kaynakça

• Amado, C.A.E.F. & Santos, S.P. 2009. Challenges for performance assessment and improvement in primary health care: The case of the Portuguese health centres. Health Policy, 91: 43-56.
• Avkiran, N.K., Tone, K. & Tsutsui, M. 2008. Bridging radial and non-radial measures of efficiency in DEA. Annals of Operations Research, 164: 127-138.
• -
• Aydın, S., Demir, M., Guler, H., Ozturk, A., Tarhan, D., Demir, B. & Kapan, S.H. 2009. Institutional Performance and Quality Applications in Healthcare. Ankara: Lazer Ofset Publications.
• Boenink, M. 2012. Debating the Desirability of New Biomedical Technologies: Lessons from the Introduction of Breast Cancer Screening in the Netherlands. Health Care Analysis, 20(1): 84-102.
• Bosworth, D., Massini, S. & Nakayama, M. 2005. Quality change and productivity improvement in the Japanese economy. Japan and the World Economy, 17: 1–23.
• Butler, T.W. & Li, L. 2005. The utility of returns to scale in DEA programming: An analysis of Michigan rural hospitals. European Journal of Operational Research, 161(2): 469-477.
• Camanho, A.S. & Dyson, R.G. 2006. Data envelopment analysis and malmquist indices for measuring group performance. European Journal of Operational Research, 161: 432-446.
• Cullinane, K., Ji P. & Wang, T. 2004. An application of DEA Windows Analysis to container port production. Review of Network Economics, 3(2): 184–206.
• Dwarswaard, J., Hilhorst, M. & Trappenburg M. 2011. The Doctor and the Market: About the Influence of Market Reforms on the Professional Medical Ethics of Surgeons and General Practitioners in The Netherlands. Health Care Analysis, 19(4): 388-402.
• Dyson, R.G., Allen, R., Camanho, A.S., Podinovski, V.V., Sarrico, C.S. & Shale, E.A. 2001. Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2): 245–259.
• Geisler, E. 2011. Linking medical technology and quality of healthcare delivery: An explanatory study of stage model. International Journal of Healthcare Technology and Management 12(3/4): 199-214.
• Gerhardus, D. 2003. Robot-assisted surgery: The future is here. Journal of Healthcare Management, 48(4): 242-251.
• Ghodeswar, B.M. & Vaidyanathan, J. 2007. Organizational Adoption of Medical Technology in Healthcare Sector. Journal of Service Research, 7(2): 57-81.
• Gok, S.M. & Sezen, B. 2012. Capacity inefficiencies of teaching and non-teaching hospitals. Service Industries Journal, 32(14): 2307-2328.
• Helper, S. & Kiehl, J. 2004. Developing supplier capabilities: Market and non-market approaches. Industry and Innovation, 11: 89-107.
• Hollingsworth, B. 2008. The measurement of efficiency and productivity of health care delivery. Health Economics, 17(10): 1107-1128.
• Irwin, J.G., Hoffman, J.J. & Lamont, B.T. 1998. The effect of the acquisition of technological innovations on organizational performance: A resource-based view. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 15: 25-54.
• Jönsson, B. 1997. Economic evaluation of medical technologies in Sweden. Social Science & Medicine, 45(4): 597-604.
• Kontodimopoulos N. & Niakas D. 2005. Efficiency measurement of hemodialysis units in Greece with data envelopment analysis. Health Policy, 71: 195-204.
• Kumar, S. & Gulati, R. 2008. An Examination of Technical, Pure Technical and Scale Efficiency in Indian Publick Sector Banks using Data Envelopment Analysis. Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics, 1: 33-69.
• Langabeer, J.R. 2008. Health care operations management: A quantitative approach to business and logistics. Massachusetts: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
• Lanjananda, P. & Patterson, P.G. 2009. Determinants of customer-oriented behavior in a health care context. Journal of Service Management, 20: 5-32.
• Liu, G.G., Fukuda, T., Lee, C.E., Chen, V. & Zheng, Q. 2009. Evidence-based decision making on medical technologies in China, Japan, and Singapore. Value in Health, 12(3): 12-17.
• Marceau, J. & Basri, E. 2001. Translation innovation systems into industrial policy: The healthcare sector in Australia. Industry and Innovation, 8(3): 291-308.
• Mollahaliloglu, S., Basara, B.B. & Eryilmaz Z. 2011. Health Statistics Year Book 2010. Ankara: Kalkan.
• Mutter, R., Valdmanis V. & Rosko, M. 2010. High versus lower quality hospitals: A comparison of environmental characteristics and technical efficiency. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 10: 134-153.
• Ozcan, Y.A. 2009. Quantitative Methods in Health Care Management: Techniques and Applications. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
• Retzlaff-Roberts, D., Chang, C.F. & Rubin, R.M. 2004. Technical efficiency in the use of health care resources: A comparison of OECD countries. Health Policy, 69: 55-72.
• Sellers-Rubio, R. & Mas-Ruiz, F. (2007) An empirical analysis of productivity growth in retail services: evidence from Spain. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18: 52-69.
• Sherman, D. 1984. Data Envelopment Analysis as a new managerial audit methodology – test and evaluation. Auditing: A Journal of Practice and Theory, 4: 35-53.
• Sorenson, C. & Kanavos, P. 2011. Medical Technology Procurement in Europe: A cross-country comparison of current practice and policy. Health Policy, 100: 43-50.
• Valdmanis, V.G. 2010. Measuring economies of scale at the city market level. Journal of Health Care Finance, 37: 78-90.
• Weng, S.J., Wu, T., Blackhurst, J. & Mackulak, G. 2009. An extended DEA model for hospital performance evaluation and improvement. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 9: 39-53.