Accreditation and improvement in process quality of care: a nationwide study

Impact of the Accreditation Program of the Saudi Central Board for Accreditation of Healthcare Institutions on the Safety Dimension of the Institute of Medicine Quality

Background

Although hospital accreditation is recognized as a tool for improving healthcare, there are inconsistent results regarding its impact on healthcare quality. In Saudi Arabia, it is mandatory for all Ministry of Health (MOH) hospitals to be accredited by the Central Board for Accreditation of Healthcare Institutions (CBAHI).

Purpose

This study measured the impact of the CBAHI accreditation program on the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) safety dimension in Madinah.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted using retrospective data gathered from a review of hospital records over 60 months (ie, 12 months before, 36 during, and 12 post-accreditation). The data were analyzed using piecewise (segmented) regression analysis.

Results

The three indicators (ie: incident reports, medication errors, and nosocomial infection) were continuously improved compared to the data before accreditation, as a results of implementing the CBAHI accreditation program. Therefore, the CBAHI had a significantly positively impacts on MOH hospitals' safety dimension.

Conclusion

Complying with the CBAHI standards can help reduce the rates of incident reports, medication errors, nosocomial infections, and post-admission mortality. This study provides insight for MOH hospitals and opportunities to expand the accreditation program to improve the quality of healthcare services.

What GPs do to meet accreditation standards - implementation activities and perceived improvements attributed to general practice accreditation

BACKGROUND

Healthcare accreditation is a widely implemented tool used to enhance the quality of care and underpin quality control. However, research is sparse on the accreditation process in general practice. The aim of this study was to explore how team-based implementation activities preceding accreditation were associated with self-perceived improvements in emergency preparedness (preparedness for urgent disease and cardiac arrest) and handling of prescription renewals in Danish general practice.

METHODS

GPs (general practitioners) completed a questionnaire exploring practice-team activities conducted to implement two specific accreditation standards and the related improvements as perceived by the GPs. The following implementation activities were selected, inspired by Normalization Process Theory: Common understanding (obtaining a common understanding of the purpose of implementing changes according to the accreditation standard), key person (assigning a key person responsible for working with the standard), and easy integration (finding it easy to integrate changes into existing working procedures). Data were analysed with logistic regression, and adjusted analyses included practice type, number of GP partners, number of staff, training site for junior GPs and administrative region.

RESULTS

The total response rate was 74% (n = 920). Around 80% of the clinics reported having conducted team-based implementation activities. Almost half of the clinics (48%) reported perceived improvements in the emergency preparedness, and 30% reported perceived improvements in the handling of prescription renewals. Obtaining a common understanding was found to have a strong, significant association with perceived improvements in the emergency preparedness (OR = 5.07 (3.06-8.40)) and handling of prescription renewals (OR = 3.66 (2.07-6.46)). Easy integration of changes was also significantly associated with improvements in both emergency preparedness (OR = 1.88 (1.24-2.85)) and handling of prescription renewals (OR = 2.34 (1.44-3.79)), whereas assigning a key person was only significantly associated with improved emergency preparedness (OR = 1.95 (1.19-3.19)).

CONCLUSION

Clinical quality initiatives that involve collaboration within a practice team are more likely to cause improvements if specific team-based implementation activities are conducted. It is particularly important to facilitate a common understanding of the purpose of the initiative. Therefore, external support for quality initiatives aiming at the practice level in general practice should facilitate such team-based activities.

Composite measures of quality of health care: Evidence mapping of methodology and reporting

Background

Quality indicators are used to quantify the quality of care. A large number of quality indicators makes assessment of overall quality difficult, time consuming and impractical. There is consequently an increasing interest for composite measures based on a combination of multiple indicators.

Objective

To examine the use of different approaches to construct composite measures of quality of care and to assess the use of methodological considerations and justifications.

Methods

We conducted a literature search on PubMed and EMBASE databases (latest update 1 December 2020). For each publication, we extracted information on the weighting and aggregation methodology that had been used to construct composite indicator(s).

Results

A total of 2711 publications were identified of which 145 were included after a screening process. Opportunity scoring with equal weights was the most used approach (86/145, 59%) followed by all-or-none scoring (48/145, 33%). Other approaches regarding aggregation or weighting of individual indicators were used in 32 publications (22%). The rationale for selecting a specific type of composite measure was reported in 36 publications (25%), whereas 22 papers (15%) addressed limitations regarding the composite measure.

Conclusion

Opportunity scoring and all-or-none scoring are the most frequently used approaches when constructing composite measures of quality of care. The attention towards the rationale and limitations of the composite measures appears low.

Discussion

Considering the widespread use and the potential implications for decision-making of composite measures, a high level of transparency regarding the construction process of the composite and the functionality of the measures is crucial.

Patients' Evaluation of the Quality of Emergency Care Services in Jordan: Integration of Patient Centeredness Model

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Accreditation is viewed to enhance the total quality of healthcare. The present study aims at assessing patients' perspectives toward the quality of emergency healthcare services at different hospitals with different characteristics in Jordan. The elements of patients' perception were aligned with the conceptual framework of Patient Centeredness Model.

METHODS

This descriptive cross-sectional study was carried out in four emergency departments from different healthcare sectors and accreditation statuses in Jordan. Less urgent/nonurgent, alert, and cooperative patients were identified directly after the completion of emergency treatment. The perspectives of patients about the quality of emergency services were evaluated by 10 domains articulated in a validated accident and emergency questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 276 patients were enrolled in the study. Private sector scored higher in all assessment domains in both accredited and nonaccredited hospitals in comparison with the government sector. Accredited government hospitals scored higher in patients' evaluation for "doctor and nurse," "investigations," "pain," and "overall respect of medical staff" domains than nonaccredited government hospitals. The overall experience was significantly different between accredited and nonaccredited government hospitals.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Quality of emergency care services should be assessed through various dimensions related to patients' perspectives. Patients' perception toward the quality of emergency health services is evidently enhanced by accreditation especially in the government sector.

Does Accreditation Symbolise Quality in Public Healthcare Delivery? An Investigation of Hospitals in Kerala

Accreditation has become an important benchmark for healthcare organisations, and accordingly, many government hospitals in Kerala got accredited with national level (National Accreditation Board for Hospitals & Healthcare Providers [NABH]) and state level (Kerala Accreditation Standards for Hospitals [KASH]) accreditation programmes. This study examined the quality of public healthcare delivery in these accredited hospitals while having a comparison with the non-accredited hospitals. It also compared the impact of national and state-level accreditation programmes in Kerala public healthcare settings. This cross-sectional study conducted between July 2017 and July 2018, employing a positivist approach using stratified random sampling. In total, 621 samples were collected from inpatients of both accredited (NABH and KASH) (312) and non-accredited (309) public healthcare institutions in Kerala. Nine constructs overarching the quality of healthcare delivery and patient satisfaction construct are used in the study. The study found that patient satisfaction is identical in both accredited and non-accredited hospitals ( M = 4.28). Patient satisfaction in NABH accredited hospital ( M = 4.27 ± 0.67874) is lower than that of KASH accredited hospital ( M = 4.30 ± 1.25417). The mean score of six constructs of quality healthcare delivery of KASH accredited hospitals is higher than NABH accredited. The study revealed that accreditation brings improvement in certain dimensions of healthcare delivery but does not bring a holistic change. The study concluded that if accreditation has to symbolize quality healthcare delivery, infrastructural and interpersonnel components of healthcare delivery must be improved.

The impact of hospital accreditation on the quality of healthcare: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

Accreditation is viewed as a reputable tool to evaluate and enhance the quality of health care. However, its effect on performance and outcomes remains unclear. This review aimed to identify and analyze the evidence on the impact of hospital accreditation.

METHODS

We systematically searched electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, MEDLINE (OvidSP), CDSR, CENTRAL, ScienceDirect, SSCI, RSCI, SciELO, and KCI) and other sources using relevant subject headings. We included peer-reviewed quantitative studies published over the last two decades, irrespective of its design or language. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, two reviewers independently screened initially identified articles, reviewed the full-text of potentially relevant studies, extracted necessary data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using a validated tool. The accreditation effects were synthesized and categorized thematically into six impact themes.

RESULTS

We screened a total of 17,830 studies, of which 76 empirical studies that examined the impact of accreditation met our inclusion criteria. These studies were methodologically heterogeneous. Apart from the effect of accreditation on healthcare workers and particularly on job stress, our results indicate a consistent positive effect of hospital accreditation on safety culture, process-related performance measures, efficiency, and the patient length of stay, whereas employee satisfaction, patient satisfaction and experience, and 30-day hospital readmission rate were found to be unrelated to accreditation. Paradoxical results regarding the impact of accreditation on mortality rate and healthcare-associated infections hampered drawing firm conclusions on these outcome measures.

CONCLUSION

There is reasonable evidence to support the notion that compliance with accreditation standards has multiple plausible benefits in improving the performance in the hospital setting. Despite inconclusive evidence on causality, introducing hospital accreditation schemes stimulates performance improvement and patient safety. Efforts to incentivize and modernize accreditation are recommended to move towards institutionalization and sustaining the performance gains. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020167863.

The association between first-time accreditation and the delivery of recommended care: a before and after study in the Faroe Islands

Background

Significant resources are spent on hospital accreditation worldwide. However, documentation of the effects of accreditation on processes, quality of care and outcomes in healthcare remain scarce. This study aimed to examine changes in the delivery of patient care in accordance with clinical guidelines (recommended care) after first-time accreditation in a care setting not previously exposed to systematic quality improvement initiatives.

Methods

We conducted a before and after study based on medical record reviews in connection with introducing first-time accreditation. We included patients with stroke/transient ischemic attack, bleeding gastric ulcer, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), childbirth, heart failure and hip fracture treated at public, non-psychiatric Faroese hospitals during 2012–2013 (before accreditation) or 2017–2018 (after accreditation). The intervention was the implementation of a modified second version of The Danish Healthcare Quality Program (DDKM) from 2014 to 2016 including an on-site accreditation survey in the Faroese hospitals. Recommended care was assessed using 63 disease specific patient level process performance measures in seven clinical conditions. We calculated the fulfillment and changes in the opportunity-based composite score and the all-or-none score.

Results

We included 867 patient pathways (536 before and 331 after). After accreditation, the total opportunity-based composite score was marginally higher though the change did not reach statistical significance (adjusted percentage point difference (%): 4.4%; 95% CI: − 0.7 to 9.6). At disease level, patients with stroke/transient ischemic attack, bleeding gastric ulcer, COPD and childbirth received a higher proportion of recommended care after accreditation. No difference was found for heart failure and diabetes. Hip fracture received less recommended care after accreditation. The total all-or-none score, which is the probability of a patient receiving all recommended care, was significantly higher after accreditation (adjusted relative risk (RR): 2.32; 95% CI: 2.03 to 2.67). The improvement was particularly strong for patients with COPD (RR: 16.22; 95% CI: 14.54 to 18.10).

Conclusion

Hospitals were in general more likely to provide recommended care after first-time accreditation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06952-w.

Hospital accreditation impact on healthcare quality dimensions: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the impact of hospital accreditation on healthcare quality indicators, as classified into seven healthcare quality dimensions.

DATA SOURCE

We searched eight databases in June 2020: EBSCO, PubMed, Web of Science, Emerald, ProQuest, Science Direct, Scopus and Virtual Health Library. Search terms were conceptualized into three groups: hospitals, accreditation and terms relating to healthcare quality. The eligibility criteria included academic articles that applied quantitative methods to examine the impact of hospital accreditation on healthcare quality indicators.

STUDY SELECTION

We applied the PICO framework to select the articles according to the following criteria: Population-all types of hospitals; Intervention-hospital accreditation; Comparison-quantitative method applied to compare accredited vs. nonaccredited hospitals, or hospitals before vs. after accreditation; Outcomes-regarding the seven healthcare quality dimensions. After a critical appraisal of the 943 citations initially retrieved, 36 studies were included in this review.

RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

Overall results suggest that accreditation may have a positive impact on efficiency, safety, effectiveness, timeliness and patient-centeredness. In turn, only one study analyzes the impact on access, and no study has investigated the impact on equity dimension yet.

CONCLUSION

Mainly due to the methodological shortcomings, the positive impact of accreditation on healthcare dimensions should be interpreted with caution. This study provides an up-to-date overview of the main themes examined in the literature, highlighting critical knowledge-gaps and methodological flaws. The findings may provide value to healthcare stakeholders in terms of improving their ability to assess the relevance of accreditation processes.

Facebook Reviews as a Supplemental Tool for Hospital Patient Satisfaction and Its Relationship with Hospital Accreditation in Malaysia

Patient satisfaction is one indicator used to assess the impact of accreditation on patient care. However, traditional patient satisfaction surveys have a few disadvantages, and some researchers have suggested that social media be used in their place. Social media usage is gaining popularity in healthcare organizations, but there is still a paucity of data to support it. The purpose of this study was to determine the association between online reviews and hospital patient satisfaction and the relationship between online reviews and hospital accreditation. We used a cross-sectional design with data acquired from the official Facebook pages of 48 Malaysian public hospitals, 25 of which are accredited. We collected all patient comments from Facebook reviews of those hospitals between 2018 and 2019. Spearman’s correlation and logistic regression were used to evaluate the data. There was a significant and moderate correlation between hospital patient satisfaction and online reviews. Patient satisfaction was closely connected to urban location, tertiary hospital, and previous Facebook ratings. However, hospital accreditation was not found to be significantly associated with online reports of patient satisfaction. This groundbreaking study demonstrates how Facebook reviews can assist hospital administrators in monitoring their institutions’ quality of care in real time.

Is a hospital quality policy based on a triad of accreditation, public reporting and inspection evidence-based? A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Since 2009, hospital quality policy in Flanders, Belgium, is built around a quality-of-care triad, which encompasses accreditation, public reporting (PR) and inspection. Policy makers are currently reflecting on the added value of this triad.

METHODS

We performed a narrative review of the literature published between 2009 and 2020 to examine the evidence base of the impact accreditation, PR and inspection, both individually and combined, has on patient processes and outcomes. The following patient outcomes were examined: mortality, length of stay, readmissions, patient satisfaction, adverse outcomes, failure to rescue, adherence to process measures and risk aversion. The impact of accreditation, PR and inspection on these outcomes was evaluated as either positive, neutral (i.e. no impact observed or mixed results reported) or negative.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the current evidence base on the impact of accreditation, PR and inspection on patient processes and outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 69 studies, of which 40 were on accreditation, 24 on PR, three on inspection and two on accreditation and PR concomitantly. Identified studies reported primarily low-level evidence (level IV, n = 53) and were heterogeneous in terms of implemented programmes and patient populations (often narrow in PR research). Overall, a neutral categorization was determined in 30 articles for accreditation, 23 for PR and four for inspection. Ten of these recounted mixed results. For accreditation, a high number (n = 12) of positive research on adherence to process measures was discovered.

CONCLUSION

The individual impact of accreditation, PR and inspection, the core of Flemish hospital quality, was found to be limited on patient outcomes. Future studies should investigate the combined effect of multiple quality improvement strategies.

Comparison of Major Clinical Outcomes between Accredited and Nonaccredited Hospitals for Inpatient Care of Acute Myocardial Infarction

Hospital accreditation programs are used worldwide to improve the quality of care and improve patient safety. It is of great help in improving the structure of hospitals, but there are mixed research results on improving the clinical outcome of patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the levels of core clinical outcome indicators after receiving inpatient services from accredited and nonaccredited hospitals in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). For all patients with AMI admitted to general hospitals in Korea from 2010 to 2017, their 30-day mortality and readmissions and length of stay were compared according to accreditation status. In addition, through a multivariate model that controls various patients’ and hospitals’ factors, the differences in those indicators were analyzed more accurately. The 30-day mortality of patients admitted to accredited hospitals was statistically significantly lower than that of patients admitted to nonaccredited hospitals. However, for 30-day readmission and length of stay, accreditation did not appear to yield more desirable results. This study shows that when evaluating the clinical impact of hospital accreditation programs, not only the mortality but also various clinical indicators need to be included, and a more comprehensive review is needed.

Iran hospital accreditation standards: challenges and solutions

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify the challenges of Iranian hospital accreditation standards and provide solutions.

DESIGN

A qualitative research design was used in this study. Open and semi-structured interviews were conducted in 2018. Thematic analysis was used to analyse qualitative data.

SETTING

Public, private, semi-public, charity and military hospitals in Tehran, Iran.

PARTICIPANTS

A pluralistic evaluation approach was employed and 151 participants including policy makers, hospital management and staff, accreditation surveyors and university professors participated in this study.

RESULTS

Challenges of hospital accreditation standards were grouped into two groups: standards development process and standards content. Lack of an independent standards development committee, insufficient expertise of committee members, inconsistencies among the standards' constructs, inappropriate standard classification, ambiguity of standards, unmeasurable standards, vague and inflexible scoring system, and inability to use some standards were the main challenges of Iran hospital accreditation standards. Establishing a scientific committee consisting of representative from hospitals, health insurance companies, professional and scientific associations and universities for standard development, training the committee members, and utilizing hospital's feedback will help address these problems.

CONCLUSION

Iran's hospital accreditation standards face challenges that prevent them from achieving their goals, that is, improving the quality, safety, effectiveness and efficiency of hospital services. Necessary measures should be taken to solve these problems.

Interface between accreditation and patient safety: nursing team perspectives

OBJECTIVE

To understand the relationship between accreditation and patient safety from the perspective of the nursing team.

METHOD

A descriptive-exploratory study implementing a qualitative approach. It was developed with nursing workers from two Intensive Care Units in a hospital certified in excellence by Brazilian accreditation. The participants responded to individual semi-structured interviews guided by the question: "Tell me about the relationship between accreditation and patient safety in this hospital and unit". The corpus was transcribed in full, and the thematic content analysis technique was used.

RESULTS

There were 14 professionals interviewed. There are several specific improvements in patient safety mediated by accreditation between the two emerging categories. The workers reported that at times the advances in safe care are transversally visible to the certification/maintenance of accreditation visit, and at times they point to safety as something independent of the quality seal.

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that the investigated relationship was shown to be both dependent, as accreditation is a bridge for specific improvements, as well as independent, since patient safety goes beyond the certification process itself. In this context, criticality was revealed among nursing workers.

Association between Accreditation and In-Hospital Mortality in Patients with Major Cardiovascular Diseases in South Korean Hospitals: Pre-Post Accreditation Comparison

The direct impact of hospital accreditation on patients' clinical outcomes is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether mortality within 30 days of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (AMI), ischemic stroke (IS), and hemorrhagic stroke (HS) differed before and after hospital accreditation. This study targeted patients who had been hospitalized for the three diseases at the general hospitals newly accredited by the government in 2014. Thirty-day mortality rates of three years before and after accreditation were compared. Mortality within 30 days of hospitalization for the three diseases was lower after accreditation than before (7.34% vs. 6.15% for AMI; 4.64% vs. 3.80% for IS; and 18.52% vs. 15.81% for HS). In addition, hospitals that meet the criteria of the patient care process domain have a statistically lower mortality rate than hospitals that do not. In the newly accredited Korean general hospital, it was confirmed that in-hospital mortality rates of major cardiovascular diseases were lower than before the accreditation.

Accreditation as a management tool: a national survey of hospital managers' perceptions and use of a mandatory accreditation program in Denmark

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to examine managers' attitudes towards and use of a mandatory accreditation program in Denmark, the Danish Healthcare Quality Program (Den Danske Kvalitetsmodel [DDKM]) after it was terminated in 2015.

METHODS

We designed a nationwide cross-sectional online survey of all senior and middle managers in the 31 somatic and psychiatric public hospitals in Denmark. We elicited managers' attitudes towards and use of DDKM as a management using 5-point Likert scales. Regression analysis examined differences in responses by age, years in current position, and management level.

RESULTS

The response rate was 49% with 533 of 1095 managers participating. Overall, managers' perceptions of accreditation were favorable, highlighting key findings about some of the strengths of accreditation. DDKM was found most useful for standardizing processes, improving patient safety, and clarifying responsibility in the organization. Managers were most negative about DDKM's ability to improve their hospitals' financial performance, reshape the work environment, and support the function of clinical teams. Results were generally consistent across age and management level; however, managers with greater years of experience in their position had more favorable attitudes, and there was some variation in attitudes towards and use of DDKM between regions.

CONCLUSION

Future attention should be paid to attitudes towards accreditation. Positive attitudes and the effective use of accreditation as a management tool can support the implementation of accreditation, the development of standards, overcoming disagreements and boundaries and improving future quality programs.

Evaluation of integrated antenatal care implementation in primary health care

Purpose

This study was aimed to evaluate the implementation of an integrated antenatal care (ANC) scheme through a retrospective document study using a checklist for measuring the adequacy of the cohort ANC register documented by midwives in an urban area and to describe the barriers for the midwives during the ANC record process.

Design/methodology/approach

An exploratory descriptive study using a sequential mixed method was utilised where a quantitative method was employed by collecting secondary data of 150 entries of the cohort ANC register and followed by in-depth interviews among midwives and community health workers.

Findings

The results show that the cohort registry indicators for integrated care such as laboratory and management were poorly recorded. Several barriers were found and categorised during the implementation of the integrated ANC, namely (1) governance and strategy, (2) process of care, (3) organisation and management support.

Research limitations/implications

The contribution of this present research is that it provides empirical data of the integrated ANC implementation in primary health care (PHC) which has the responsibility to deliver an integrated level of care for ANC using a cohort registry for pregnancy registration monitoring which facilitates the continuity and quality of care.

Practical implications

Practical implication of the finding is that functional integration such as the clinical information system to facilitate an efficient and effective approach during the implementation of integrated ANC in primary care should be considered to support the clinical, professional, organisational, system and normative integration.

Originality/value

Since only limited studies have been conducted to assess the quality of the cohort ANC registry and to investigate the barriers against integrated ANC implementation in Indonesia, the research findings are valuable information for the national and local governments to improve the ANC service in Indonesia.

Hospital accreditation: Driving best outcomes through continuity of midwifery care? A scoping review

PROBLEM

Continuity of midwifery care models are the gold standard of maternity care. Despite being recommended by the Australian Health Ministers' Advisory Council, few women in Australia have access to such models.

BACKGROUND

Extensive research shows that if all women had access to continuity of midwifery care, maternal and neonatal outcomes would improve. Hospital accreditation, the main national safety and quality system in Australia, aims to encourage and enable the translation of healthcare quality and safety standards into practice.

AIM

This paper explored the realities and possibilities of a health care accreditation system driving health service re-organisation towards the provision of continuity of midwifery care for childbearing women.

METHODS

A scoping review sought literature at the macro (policy) level. From 3036 records identified, the final number of sources included was 100:73 research articles and eight expert opinion pieces/editorials from journals, 15 government/accreditation documents, three government/accreditation websites, and one thesis.

FINDINGS

Two narrative themes emerged: (1) Hospital accreditation: 'Here to stay' but no clear evidence and calls for change. (2) Measuring and implementing quality and safety in maternity care.

DISCUSSION

Regulatory frameworks drive hospitals' priorities, potentially creating conditions for change. The case for reform in the hospital accreditation system is persuasive and, in maternity services, clear. Mechanisms to actualise the required changes in maternity care are less apparent, but clearly possible.

CONCLUSIONS

Structural changes to Australia's health accreditation system are needed to prioritise, and mandate, continuity of midwifery care.

S. Impact of accreditation on performance of healthcare organizations

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to review the accreditation research in specific to its effect on the performance of healthcare organizations.

Design/methodology/approach

A comprehensive search and analysis of literature on the effect of healthcare accreditation were conducted between June 2017 and May 2018. The study identified 62 empirical research studies that examined the effect of healthcare accreditation programmes. Study particulars such as year of publication, objectives, focus of the study, research settings and key findings were recorded. A content analysis was performed to identify the frequency of the main themes in the literature. Knowledge gaps needing further examination were identified.

Findings

Majority of the accreditation impact studies were carried out in the developed nations (n = 49). The thematic categories, that is the impact on “patient safety and healthcare quality” (n = 26), “healthcare professionals’ views” (n = 28) and “clinical process and outcomes” (n = 17) were addressed more times. Whereas the other two thematic categories “organizational performance” and “consumers’ views or satisfaction,” each was examined less than 10 instances. This review reveals mixed views on effect of healthcare accreditation. The varied quality of studies and the availability of a few studies on consumers’ perception of accreditation effectiveness were the important limiting factors of this review.

Originality/value

The findings are valuable to healthcare managers and hospital administrators in accreditation decisions, whereas findings are of value to researchers and academicians in terms of gaps identified for future research studies pertaining to the impact of healthcare accreditation. Future studies need to consider holistic theoretical frameworks for assessing the effect of accreditation on performance of healthcare organizations to achieve precise results.

How Does ISO 15189 Laboratory Accreditation Support the Delivery of Healthcare in Ethiopia? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Assessing quality by considering input, process and output level quality variables is important to ensure improved quality services. Designing and execution of an effective quality management system are aimed for the purpose of quality improvement, error reduction and associated risks. Therefore, this review is designed to assess the value of accreditation on the performance of healthcare institutions in ensuring quality improvement interventions. Moreover, this review presents important concepts of accreditation and the aspects of quality.

METHODS

Published articles were downloaded using EndNote® application software program from PubMed (NML) database, Web of Sciences (TS) and Google Scholar. From a total of 883 downloaded full-text published materials, only 28 journals and 1 report issued from 2010 to 2017 were used for the development of this review.

RESULT

The overall quality of healthcare services in developing countries was error-prone and suffered from limitations. These could be associated with wrong interventions and increased risks. Accreditation schemes have been implemented to provide quality care and ensure safety.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation feedback induces interventions aimed at quality improvement and ensures better management systems, good process design, wise resource utilization, meeting patients' need and increased satisfaction. Hence, stakeholders must be engaged in the provision of improve quality patient care and reduce associated risks. Hence, giving special quality improvement attention helps to improve quality healthcare services.

Albuminuria measurement in diabetic care: a multilevel analysis measuring the influence of accreditation on institutional performance

Background

Studies assessing institutional performance regarding quality of care are frequently performed using single-level statistical analyses investigating differences between provider averages of various quality indicators. However, such analyses are insufficient as they do not consider patients’ heterogeneity around those averages. Hence, we apply a multilevel analysis of individual-patient heterogeneity that distinguishes between ‘general’ (‘latent quality’ or measures of variance) and ‘specific’ (measures of association) contextual effects. We assess general contextual effects of the hospital departments and the specific contextual effect of a national accreditation programme on adherence to the standard benchmark for albuminuria measurement in Danish patients with diabetes.

Methods

From the Danish Adult Diabetes Database, we extracted data on 137 893 patient cases admitted to hospitals between 2010 and 2013. Applying multilevel logistic and probit regression models for every year, we quantified general contextual effects of hospital department by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) values. We evaluated the specific effect of hospital accreditation using the ORs and the change in the department variance.

Results

In 2010, the department context had considerable influence on adherence with albuminuria measurement (ICC=21.8%, AUC=0.770), but the general effect attenuated along with the implementation of the national accreditation programme. The ICC value was 16.5% in 2013 and the rate of compliance with albuminuria measurement increased from 91.6% in 2010 to 96% in 2013.

Conclusions

Parallel to implementation of the national accreditation programme, departments’ compliance with the standard benchmark for albuminuria measurement increased and the ICC values decreased, but remained high. While those results indicate an overall quality improvement, further intervention focusing on departments with the lowest compliance could be considered.

Influence of hospital Accreditation on professional satisfaction of the nursing team: mixed method study

Objective:

to analyze the influence of Accreditation on the professional satisfaction of nursing workers.

Method:

multicentric, cross-sectional research, outlined by the sequential explanatory mixed method. In the first preponderant, quantitative step, the validated Brazilian version of the Index of Work Satisfaction was applied to a sample (n = 226) representative of nursing professionals from three hospitals. One hospital was private and certified by Accreditation; another hospital was private and non-certified; and another was public and non-certified. By connection, the second step (qualitative) complemented the quantitative analysis. In this step, interviews (n = 39) were carried out and summarized through the method of Discourse of the Collective Subject. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were applied to the quantitative data connected to the qualitative support, as well as a joint presentation of part of the information in a joint display.

Results:

workers of the certified hospital had a better overall job satisfaction score. There were more statistical associations among workers in private hospitals. The comparison of the three groups investigated in the two steps of the mixed study confirmed Accreditation as a positive factor for professional satisfaction. The public hospital excelled in relation to the certified hospital in terms of salary, job requirements and interaction.

Conclusion:

Accreditation positively influenced the professional satisfaction of the nursing teams investigated.

Association between patient outcomes and accreditation in US hospitals: observational study

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether patients admitted to US hospitals that are accredited have better outcomes than those admitted to hospitals reviewed through state surveys, and whether accreditation by The Joint Commission (the largest and most well known accrediting body with an international presence) confers any additional benefits for patients compared with other independent accrediting organizations.

DESIGN

Observational study.

SETTING

4400 hospitals in the United States, of which 3337 were accredited (2847 by The Joint Commission) and 1063 underwent state based review between 2014 and 2017.

PARTICIPANTS

4 242 684 patients aged 65 years and older admitted for 15 common medical and six common surgical conditions and survey respondents of the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Provider and Systems (HCAHPS).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Risk adjusted mortality and readmission rates at 30 days and HCAHPS patient experience scores. Hospital admissions were identified from Medicare inpatient files for 2014, and accreditation information was obtained from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and The Joint Commission.

RESULTS

Patients treated at accredited hospitals had lower 30 day mortality rates (although not statistically significant lower rates, based on the prespecified P value threshold) than those at hospitals that were reviewed by a state survey agency (10.2% v 10.6%, difference 0.4% (95% confidence interval 0.1% to 0.8%), P=0.03), but nearly identical rates of mortality for the six surgical conditions (2.4% v 2.4%, 0.0% (-0.3% to 0.3%), P=0.99). Readmissions for the 15 medical conditions at 30 days were significantly lower at accredited hospitals than at state survey hospitals (22.4% v 23.2%, 0.8% (0.4% to 1.3%), P<0.001) but did not differ for the surgical conditions (15.9% v 15.6%, 0.3% (-1.2% to 1.6%), P=0.75). No statistically significant differences were seen in 30 day mortality or readmission rates (for both the medical or surgical conditions) between hospitals accredited by The Joint Commission and those accredited by other independent organizations. Patient experience scores were modestly better at state survey hospitals than at accredited hospitals (summary star rating 3.4 v 3.2, 0.2 (0.1 to 0.3), P<0.001). Among accredited hospitals, The Joint Commission did not have significantly different patient experience scores compared to other independent organizations (3.1 v 3.2, 0.1 (-0.003 to 0.2), P=0.06).

CONCLUSIONS

US hospital accreditation by independent organizations is not associated with lower mortality, and is only slightly associated with reduced readmission rates for the 15 common medical conditions selected in this study. There was no evidence in this study to indicate that patients choosing a hospital accredited by The Joint Commission confer any healthcare benefits over choosing a hospital accredited by another independent accrediting organization.

Predictors of the effectiveness of accreditation on hospital performance: A nationwide stepped-wedge study

Objective

To identify predictors of the effectiveness of hospital accreditation on process performance measures.

Design

A multi-level, longitudinal, stepped-wedge, nationwide study.

Participants

All patients admitted for acute stroke, heart failure, ulcers, diabetes, breast cancer and lung cancer at Danish hospitals.

Intervention

The Danish Healthcare Quality Programme that was designed to create a framework for continuous quality improvement.

Main outcome Measure(s)

Changes in week-by-week trends of hospitals' process performance measures during the study period of 269 weeks prior to, during and post-accreditations. Process performance measures were based on 43 different processes of care obtained from national clinical quality registries. Analyses were stratified according to condition, type of care (i.e. treatment, diagnostics, secondary prevention and patient monitoring) and hospital characteristics (i.e. university affiliation, location, size, experience with accreditation and accreditation compliance).

Results

A total of 1 624 518 processes of care were included. The impact of accreditation differed across the conditions. During accreditation, heart failure and breast cancer showed less improvement than other disease areas. Across all conditions, diagnostic processes improved less rapidly than other types of processes. However, after stratifying the data by hospital characteristics, process performance measures improved more uniformly. In respect of the measures that had an unsatisfactory level of quality, the processes related to diabetes, diagnostics and patient monitoring all responded to accreditation and showed an increased improvement during the preparatory work.

Conclusion

Hospital characteristics were not found to be predictors for the effects of accreditation, whereas conditions and types of care to some extent predicted the effectiveness.

Investigation of the conditions affecting the joining of Hungarian hospitals to an accreditation programme: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

Quantitative studies have shown the various benefits for having accreditation in hospitals. However, neither of these explored the general conditions before applying for an accreditation. To close this gap, this study aimed to investigate the possible association between joining an accreditation programme with various hospital characteristics.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study was implemented using the databases of the 2013 Hungarian hospital survey and of the Hungarian State Treasury.

SETTING

Public general hospitals in Hungary.

PARTICIPANTS

The analysis involved 44 public general hospitals, 14 of which joined the preparatory project for a newly developed accreditation programme.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The outcomes included the percentage of compliance in quality management, patient information and identification, internal professional regulation, safe surgery, pressure sore prevention, infection control, the opinions of the heads of quality management regarding the usefulness of quality management and clinical audits, and finally, the total debt of the hospital per bed and per discharged patient.

RESULTS

According to our findings, the general hospitals joining the preparatory project of the accreditation programme performed better in four of the six investigated activities, the head of quality management had a better opinion on the usefulness of quality management, and both the debt per bed number and the debt per discharged patient were lower than those who did not join. However, no statistically significant differences between the two groups were found in any of the examined outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that hospitals applying for an accreditation programme do not differ significantly in characteristics from those which did not apply. This means that if in the future the accredited hospitals become better than other hospitals, then the improvement could be solely contributed to the accreditation.

Perspectives: answering questions about quality improvement: suggestions for investigators

'Does it work?' is not the only question that practical improvers have of those investigating of quality improvements. They also want to know, 'Will it work here? What conditions do we need to implement and sustain it? Can we adapt it? How much will it cost and save? Is there enough evidence to spread it?'This perspectives article describes methods that investigators can use to answer these questions about improvement changes and improvement methods. It suggests that one reason why research is underused by improvers is because there is little research that answers these questions that would enable improvers to decide whether or how to implement an improvement in their local setting. It shows improvers that answers are possible and where improvers might find research and reports which answer these questions. It is based on reviews of research and reports about methods for producing valid and actionable knowledge to answer these questions. It describes a new 'quality improvement investigation movement' which is uniting applied researchers and improvers to use innovative methods to answer these questions. These investigators recognize the strengths of the randomized controlled trail method, and how easy it is to draw the wrong conclusions from data generated using lower cost and more timely methods. It emphasizes how investigators can choose a method suited to each question, describe the limitations of the method and communicate to improvers the degree of certainty of their answers to the questions.

The impact of accreditation on healthcare quality improvement: a qualitative case study

Purpose Research on accreditation has mostly focused on assessing its impact using large scale quantitative studies, yet little is known on how quality is improved in practice through an accreditation process. Using a case study of an acute teaching hospital in Portugal, the purpose of this paper is to explore the dynamics through which accreditation can lead to an improvement in the quality of healthcare services provided. Design/methodology/approach Data for the case study was collected through 46 in-depth semi-structured interviews with 49 clinical and non-clinical members of staff. Data were analyzed using a framework thematic analysis. Findings Interviewees felt that hospital accreditation contributed to the improvement of healthcare quality in general, and more specifically to patient safety, as it fostered staff reflection, a higher standardization of practices, and a greater focus on quality improvement. However, findings also suggest that the positive impact of accreditation resulted from the approach the hospital adopted in its implementation as well as the fact that several of the procedures and practices required by accreditation were already in place at the hospital, albeit often in an informal way. Research limitations/implications The study was conducted in only one hospital. The design of an accreditation implementation plan tailored to the hospital's context can significantly contribute to positive outcomes in terms of quality and patient safety improvements. Originality/value This study provides a better understanding of how accreditation can contribute to healthcare quality improvement. It offers important lessons on the factors and processes that potentiate quality improvements through accreditation.