---

---

Introduction: Years after the first successful kidney transplant, there are still many questions about the best immunosuppression regimen for these patients. Various studies have shown that long-term use of calcineurin inhibitor drugs can be associated with chronic nephrotoxicity and lead to irreversible damage to the transplanted organ. Therefore, the goal is to use immunosuppressive drugs and reduce the dose of calcineurin inhibitors as much as possible without increasing the risk of transplant rejection. This study aims to compare renal function, the rate of viral infections, and the occurrence of rejection after kidney transplantation in patients on two different treatment regimens including everolimus plus a low dose of calcineurin inhibitor against the standard protocol of calcineurin inhibitor along with mycophenolic acid in 60 kidney transplanted patients.
Methods: This clinical trial was conducted at Labbafinejad Hospital in Tehran between 2018-2019 on 60 kidney transplant patients aged 18 to 65 years and for 12 months.
Results: In terms of kidney function status based on GFR, except for the first month (P=0.02), there was no significant difference between the two groups in any of the time periods (P>0.05). Also, there was no statistically significant difference between the two study groups in terms of hospitalization length after transplantation and re-hospitalization during the study (P>0.05). 
Conclusions: The results of this study showed that the everolimus regimen and low dose of calcineurin inhibitor can be used de novo in transplant patients without increasing the risk of rejection in them and at the same time it may be able to reduce the incidence of viral infections after transplantation.
 

---

Good governance, as one of the fundamental concepts in managing health systems, plays a critical role in improving efficiency, effectiveness, and equity in delivering healthcare services. Emphasizing principles such as transparency, accountability, participation, and rule of law, good governance has been regarded as a framework for enhancing policymaking and management within health systems.
Objective: This study aimed to design and propose a model of good governance in the health system using a combined approach of thematic analysis and the partial least squares (PLS) method.
Methodology: The research employed both qualitative and quantitative methods. In the qualitative phase, the research population consisted of managers, experts in health and medical sciences, senior officials from the Ministry of Health and Medical Education, and academic scholars. Seventeen participants were selected using purposive and snowball sampling methods until theoretical saturation was achieved. In the quantitative phase, the PLS method was utilized to fit the proposed model. The statistical population included all health and medical professionals in Iran. Based on Cochran’s formula, the minimum sample size was calculated to be 384 participants.
Findings: The results of thematic analysis in the qualitative phase, followed by model fitting in the quantitative phase, revealed that the final model of good governance in the health system consists of seven main dimensions: effectiveness, efficiency, equity, transparency and accountability, participation, rule of law, and leadership. Each dimension was further divided into specific components, confirming their significance in strengthening good governance.
Conclusion: This study presents a comprehensive model of good governance for the health system, offering a framework to enhance policymaking, management, and performance in this field. The proposed model can serve as a tool for strategic decision-making and improving managerial structures.