DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1244009/v1
Background: The importance of paying attention to improving productivity in different departments of health system become increasingly evident due to increased costs of health care goods and services, limited resources and production facilities. The aim of this study was to measure the productivity of medical records departments of hospitals affiliated with Urmia University of Medical Sciences (UUMS) in order to provide a comprehensive analysis of their performance.
Method: In this study, total productivity and total factor productivity changes of medical record department in hospitals affiliated with UUMS were calculated by Kendrick-Creamer and Malmquist indexes in 2016-2020 and has examined the trend of each One of them.
Results: The results of Malmquist index showed that average total productivity changes of medical record departments of hospitals during the study period was equal to 1,096 which is greater than one, therefore it can be concluded that productivity has decreased by about 9.6% during the study period; Technological efficiency changes has had the greatest impact on reducing productivity compared to other factors.
Conclusion: The main cause for decreased productivity due to technological changes in the studied departments is the lack of sufficient knowledge of the medical record department staff of hospitals in the use of technology and equipment in providing services correctly and holding training courses for the correct use of technology by personnel can be useful in this regard.
Table 1 Total factor productivity of MRDs during 2016-2020 using Kendrick-Creamer index
|
MRD |
Total factor productivity of MRDs |
Average |
||||
|
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2019 |
2020 |
||
|
1 |
6286.616 |
5384.615 |
5128.495 |
5475.806 |
6131.194 |
5681.345 |
|
2 |
10189.61 |
13612.36 |
16318.91 |
12914.82 |
12975.66 |
13202.27 |
|
3 |
11714.95 |
11705.47 |
13841.12 |
11323.89 |
12515.19 |
12220.12 |
|
4 |
28768.26 |
27457.92 |
28750.56 |
39452.57 |
23361.16 |
29558.09 |
|
5 |
15017.51 |
17541.4 |
18113.22 |
15142.11 |
13598.45 |
15882.54 |
|
6 |
12276.04 |
13111.11 |
15572.92 |
20934.68 |
17063.06 |
15791.56 |
|
7 |
23026.25 |
22415.88 |
25729.26 |
18883.5 |
17436.22 |
21498.22 |
|
8 |
9810.374 |
10693.03 |
10488.33 |
9116.667 |
9106.818 |
9843.044 |
|
9 |
24081.52 |
34451.09 |
31685.75 |
35697.51 |
30948.9 |
31372.95 |
|
10 |
18493.24 |
23425.68 |
25880.63 |
18125 |
16001.74 |
20385.26 |
|
11 |
22281.9 |
25348.85 |
27815.19 |
26525.79 |
26131.69 |
25620.68 |
|
12 |
7450.758 |
11172.35 |
10583.33 |
10618.06 |
14057.29 |
10776.36 |
|
13 |
13037.55 |
12844.32 |
12940.37 |
13038.75 |
10540.74 |
12480.35 |
|
14 |
10254.05 |
10997.98 |
13609.31 |
13909.09 |
13802.37 |
12514.56 |
|
15 |
14585.77 |
12516.18 |
11410.39 |
14030.94 |
12420.73 |
12992.8 |
|
16 |
14679.26 |
12543.71 |
10189.38 |
13036.06 |
10391.53 |
12167.99 |
|
17 |
14132.69 |
15735.56 |
16514.38 |
16947.1 |
15144.4 |
15694.83 |
|
18 |
9877.66 |
10096.97 |
40256.14 |
47224.57 |
40163.54 |
29523.78 |
|
19 |
13060.14 |
14121.12 |
13138.37 |
9475.511 |
9701.715 |
11899.37 |
|
20 |
674.6032 |
73656.75 |
84026.04 |
72452.64 |
46212.83 |
55404.57 |
|
Average |
13984.94 |
18941.62 |
21599.6 |
21216.25 |
17885.26 |
18725.53 |
Table 2 The elasticity of production factors of MRDs of hospitals affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences
|
|
|
Parameter |
|
0.44 |
0.48 |
Elasticity |
Table 3 Changes in total productivity and efficiency of MRDs of hospitals affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences during 2016-2020 using DEA
|
Total productivity changes |
Scale efficiency |
Managerial efficiency |
Technological efficiency |
Technical efficiency |
Year |
|
1.350 |
0.599 |
0.860 |
2.617 |
0.516 |
2017 |
|
1.141 |
0.982 |
1.018 |
1.141 |
1.000 |
2018 |
|
1.023 |
1.208 |
1.002 |
0.845 |
1.210 |
2019 |
|
0.915 |
1.293 |
1.049 |
0.675 |
1.356 |
2020 |
|
1.096 |
0.979 |
0.979 |
1.142 |
0.959 |
Average |
Table 4 Changes in total productivity and efficiency of MRDs of hospitals affiliated to Urmia University of Medical Sciences in the all studied period using DEA method
|
MRD |
Technical efficiency |
Technological efficiency |
Managerial efficiency |
Scale efficiency |
Total productivity changes |
|
1 |
0.882 |
1.136 |
0.962 |
0.916 |
1.002 |
|
2 |
0.963 |
1.171 |
0.934 |
1.031 |
1.128 |
|
3 |
0.890 |
1.145 |
1.009 |
0.882 |
1.019 |
|
4 |
0.862 |
1.075 |
0.884 |
0.976 |
0.927 |
|
5 |
0.874 |
1.126 |
0.895 |
0.977 |
0.984 |
|
6 |
1.019 |
1.188 |
1.019 |
1.000 |
1.210 |
|
7 |
0.871 |
1.149 |
1.005 |
0.867 |
1.001 |
|
8 |
0.874 |
1.156 |
0.962 |
0.909 |
1.010 |
|
9 |
1.000 |
1.193 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
1.193 |
|
10 |
0.793 |
1.091 |
1.000 |
0.793 |
0.866 |
|
11 |
0.908 |
1.146 |
0.947 |
0.959 |
1.041 |
|
12 |
1.035 |
1.157 |
1.000 |
1.035 |
1.198 |
|
13 |
0.837 |
1.112 |
0.915 |
0.915 |
0.931 |
|
14 |
0.942 |
1.150 |
1.016 |
0.927 |
1.084 |
|
15 |
0.898 |
1.108 |
1.044 |
0.860 |
0.995 |
|
16 |
0.794 |
1.164 |
0.925 |
0.857 |
0.923 |
|
17 |
0.894 |
1.123 |
0.975 |
0.917 |
1.004 |
|
18 |
1.233 |
1.142 |
1.205 |
1.024 |
1.409 |
|
19 |
0.858 |
1.161 |
0.728 |
1.179 |
0.996 |
|
20 |
2.471 |
1.166 |
1.285 |
1.923 |
2.880 |
|
Average |
0.959 |
1.142 |
0.979 |
0.979 |
1.096 |