Journal of

---

Background: Given the importance of quality in health care and meeting the needs of patients, it seems important to measure the quality of services and identify the weaknesses from the patients' perspective. The purpose of this study is to assess the service quality (SQ) of care as perceived by people with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D). Materials & Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among 180 people with Type 2 diabetes in diabetes clinic using convenience sampling method in Tabriz, Iran in 2012. Service quality was calculated using: SQ=10 – (Importance ×Performance) based on importance and performance of non-health aspects from the patients' perspective. Validity and reliability of questionnaire was reviewed and confirmed. Independent sample T-test and ANOVA were used to investigate relationship between service quality and categorical variables. Data analyzed bySPSS13 software. Results: The average service quality score was 8.17 of 10. From the participants' perspective, of 12 aspects of service quality, communication and prevention had the highest score for importance. Dignity had the highest score for performance. However, the highest service quality values were for continuity of care, dignity and confidentiality. Conclusion: overall service quality achieved inadequate quality and there is an opportunity to improve quality of care.

---

Background: Pay-for-performance (P4P) is a payment model which tries to pay for the measured aspects of performance and encourage health care providers by providing financial incentives in order to achieve pre-defined goals. This research was done to assess the impact of P4P on efficiency of medical laboratory of Imam Reza hoapital in Tabriz in 2013.

Materials & Methods: This interventional research was a before-and-after study. In order to recognize any changes, efficiency indexes of laboratory were measured and compared whole the year. The data were collected manually assessing the related documents. For comparing efficiency before and after intervention, descriptive statistics were used.

Results: Findings showed that costs didn’t differ significantly after the intervention, but revenue was a little increased slightly (14364 to 16874). Laboratory errors were also increased after the intervention. (0 to 17 cases).

Conclusion: Regarding the results of survey , it seems that we can conclude that this bonus payment system can be used in all levels in which care is provided such as primary health care centers, drug stores, diagnostic centers and hospitals through setting pre-defined goals and considering negative point for any staff who makes an error.