Determinants of impact of a practice accreditation program in primary care: a qualitative study

The Prerequisites of Executing the Accreditation Program for Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis

Background

In Iran, the primary healthcare system is the front-line for society's encounter with healthcare. Health planners aim to enhance quality and administer an accreditation program. This study examined program administration prerequisites through systematic review and meta-synthesis.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative literature using Thomas and Hudson's framework. Peer-reviewed papers were searched in Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Google, and Google Scholar up to 2023.

Results

The search found 1308 articles, with 37 relevant ones selected for review. Data extraction included setting, participants, study design, data collection, analysis, and themes. Thirteen qualitative subthemes were identified and were categorized under three elements of the Donabedian model.

Conclusion

Before implementing a plan, it is crucial to consider its executive prerequisites. Revision and trial-and-error approaches can be costly and time-consuming, potentially hindering the plan's effectiveness and diverting organizations from their primary goal, leading to failure.

First Clinical Nutrition Outpatient Consultation: A Review of Basic Principles in Nutritional Care of Adults with Hematologic Disease

Methods

A bibliographic survey was carried out between 2020 and 2022 using two databases: PubMed/MEDLINE and Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) and the information source Academic Google, irrespective of language or geography.

Results

In the first nutrition consultation (FNC), there should be an investigative direction focused on nutritional interventions in the short, medium, and long term. The record in the patient's medical record is relevant for carrying out the consultation, according to the recommendations of the normative councils of medicine and nutrition. The main steps to be followed are the investigation of the presence of food allergies and intolerances; the drugs/nutritional supplements in use; changes in the digestive tract; the presence or absence of picamalacia; and socioeconomic and lifestyle data. In addition, it is necessary to carry out laboratory evaluations, semiological assessment, anthropometric assessment, and assessment of food consumption. In the end, the nutritional approach should be composed of calculation of energy and macronutrient and micronutrient needs, intervention in nutritional status deviations, nutritional guidelines, and nutritional therapeutic planning of return, focusing on adherence to treatment.

Conclusion

The first nutrition consultation may represent investigative steps that help the clinical nutritionist in the management, allowing a longitudinal and specific nutritional therapeutic planning for patients assisted in large reference centers for hematological disease.

What contributes to Primary Health Care effectiveness? Integrative literature review, 2010-2020

Primary Health Care (PHC) intends to rearrange services to make it more effective. Nevertheless, effectiveness in PHC is quite a challenge. This study reviews several articles regarding the effectiveness improvements in PHC between 2010 and 2020. Ninety out of 8,369 articles found in PubMed and the Virtual Health Library databases search were selected for thematic analysis using the Atlas.ti® 9.0 software. There were four categories identified: strategies for monitoring and evaluating health services, organizational arrangements, models and technologies applied to PHC. Studies concerning the sensitive conditions indicators were predominant. Institutional assessment programs, PHC as a structuring policy, appropriate workforce, measures to increase access and digital technologies showed positive effects. However, payment for performance is still controversial. The expressive number of Brazilian publications reveals the broad diffusion of PHC in the country and the concern on its performance. These findings reassure well-known aspects, but it also points to the need for a logical model to better define what is intended as effectiveness within primary health care as well as clarify the polysemy that surrounds the concept. We also suggest substituting the term "resolvability", commonly used in Brazil, for "effectiveness".

Accreditation of primary health care centres in the KSA: Lessons from developed and developing countries

Background/Objectives

In 2013, the KSA made Central Board for Accreditation of Healthcare Institutions (CBAHI) accreditation mandatory for all healthcare facilities, including primary health care centres (PHCs) and set a target to have 502 PHCs accredited by 2020. However, there is a real gap in knowledge and research on the impact of CBAHI accreditation on PHCs. This absence of research has been linked to the lack of understanding of the accreditation programme. Therefore, it was recommended by scholars that the KSA could learn from the experience of other countries to improve policy implementation and avoid future complications.

Methods

This study aimed to explore lessons that KSA can draw from developed and developing countries that have implemented accreditation programmes for PHCs. We performed a literature review using a systematic approach to identify articles related to the accreditation of PHCs. The identified articles were examined by applying evaluation criteria in respect of prospective policy transfer.

Results

The research results yielded 22 publications from different countries. There were variations among the countries in the specific information acquired. However, Denmark had the highest number of articles providing detailed information. Regarding their aims, most studies shared the same goal of improving quality and patient safety. Generally, there was limited discussion of policy failure compared with policy success. In addition, most of the countries were in the process of implementing local accreditation. Almost all of the countries that had implemented external programmes were developing countries. In terms of application criteria, most cases made recommendations for the programme or for PHCs.

Conclusion

Analysis indicated that because of the differences in information between countries and settings, there is no ideal country-based experience from which the KSA can transfer lessons. Lessons from outside the KSA would need careful consideration when adopting them in the local context of the Kingdom.

Assessing the Presence of the Joint Commission International Accreditation Requirements in Western Saudi Arabia Hospital Pharmacies: A Cross-sectional Study

Objective

The Central Board of Accreditation for Healthcare Institutions (CBAHI) the national Saudi accreditation body accredited most hospitals in Saudi Arabia whereas, the Joint Commission International (JCI) a well-known international accreditation body accredited some hospitals. We assessed Western Saudi Arabia hospital pharmacists' knowledge, opinions, and observations about pharmacy-related JCI accreditation criteria needed for hospitals.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional survey-based study conducted among pharmacy personnel working in the Ministry of Health (MOH), Military, and private hospitals in the Makkah region in western Saudi Arabia. The present report represents the findings of descriptive and comparative analyses. Comparative analyses were tested by Student's t-test, analysis of variance, and Chi-square when applicable and a P ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Findings

One hundred and one pharmacists completed the survey; most of them were from Taif (53.5%) and Jeddah (37.6%) and fewer from Makkah (8.9%). The highest proportions were from MOH (55.4%), private (29.7%), and some from military (14.9%) hospitals. They worked mostly in hospitals accredited with CBAHI (93.1%) than JCI (58.4%) and only (41.6%) worked with quality units. Correct answers on knowledge items ranged from 14.9% to 65.3%. On five-point Likert Scale, they showed supportive ratings on how they perceived the importance of JCI statement provided (overall average score: 3.78) and on how statement criteria are implemented in their hospitals (overall average score: 3.76). Higher proportions of those working in quality units compared to their counterparts were aware that accreditation cycles for JCI and CBAHI are identical (66.7% vs. 55.9%, P = 0.009) and that JCI criteria are more concise than CBAHI (59.5% vs. 52.5%, P = 0.007). Higher proportions of those working in JCI-accredited hospitals compared to their counterparts were aware that JCI criteria are clearer than CBAHI (55.9% vs. 33.3%, P = 0.021) and that JCI criteria are more concise than CBAHI (61% vs. 47.6%, P = 0.012).

Conclusion

To a high extent, pharmacists were supportive of JCI criteria and considered the criteria to be implemented in their hospitals. There is a room for improvement to enhance awareness and support of JCI quality criteria among pharmacists.

Quality and Performance Measurement in Primary Diabetes Care: A Qualitative Study in Urban China

BACKGROUND

Quality measurements in primary healthcare (PHC) have become an essential component for improving diabetes outcomes in many high-income countries. However, little is known about their implementation within the Chinese health-system context and how they are perceived by patients, physicians, and policy-makers. We examined stakeholders' perceptions of quality and performance measurements for primary diabetes care in Shanghai, China, and analyzed facilitators and barriers to implementation.

METHODS

In-depth interviews with 26 key stakeholders were conducted from 2018 to 2019. Participants were sampled from two hospitals, four community healthcare centers (CHCs), and four institutes involved in regulating CHCs. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided data analysis.

RESULTS

Existing quality measurements were uniformly implemented via a top-down process, with daily monitoring of family doctors' work and pay-for-performance incentives. Barriers included excluding frontline clinicians from indicator planning, a lack of transparent reporting, and a rigid organizational culture with limited bottom-up feedback. Findings under the CFIR construct "organizational incentives" suggested that current pay-for-performance incentives function as a "double-edged sword," increasing family doctors' motivation to excel while creating pressures to "game the system" among some physicians. When considering the CFIR construct "reflecting and evaluating," policy-makers perceived the online evaluation application - which provides daily reports on family doctors' work - to be an essential tool for improving quality; however, this information was not visible to patients. Findings included under the "network and communication" construct showed that specialists support the work of family doctors by providing training and patient consultations in CHCs.

CONCLUSION

The quality of healthcare could be considerably enhanced by involving patients and physicians in decisions on quality measurement. Strengthening hospital-community partnerships can improve the quality of primary care in hospital-centric systems. The case of Shanghai provides compelling policy lessons for other health systems faced with the challenge of improving PHC.

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.

Future Health Today: codesign of an electronic chronic disease quality improvement tool for use in general practice using a service design approach

OBJECTIVE

To codesign an electronic chronic disease quality improvement tool for use in general practice.

DESIGN

Service design employing codesign strategies.

SETTING

General practice.

PARTICIPANTS

Seventeen staff (general practitioners, nurses and practice managers) from general practice in metropolitan Melbourne and regional Victoria and five patients from metropolitan Melbourne.

INTERVENTIONS

Codesign sessions with general practice staff, using a service design approach, were conducted to explore key design criteria and functionality of the audit and feedback and clinical decision support tools. Think aloud interviews were conducted in which participants articulated their thoughts of the resulting Future Health Today (FHT) prototype as they used it. One codesign session was held with patients. Using inductive and deductive coding, content and thematic analyses explored the development of a new technological platform and factors influencing implementation of the platform.

RESULTS

Participants identified that the prototype needed to work within their existing workflow to facilitate automated patient recall and track patients with or at-risk of specific conditions. It needed to be simple, provide visual snapshots of information and easy access to relevant guidelines and facilitate quality improvement activities. Successful implementation may be supported by: accuracy of the algorithms in FHT and data held in the practice; the platform supporting planned and spontaneous interactions with patients; the ability to hide tools; links to Medicare Benefits Schedule; and prefilled management plans. Participating patients supported the use of the platform in general practice. They suggested that use of the platform demonstrates a high level of patient care and could increase patient confidence in health practitioners.

CONCLUSION

Study participants worked together to design a platform that is clear, simple, accurate and useful and that sits within any given general practice setting. The resulting FHT platform is currently being piloted in general practices and will continue to be refined based on user feedback.

Mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external assessment: a systematic review with narrative synthesis

OBJECTIVES

External inspections are widely used to improve the quality of care. The effects of inspections remain unclear and little is known about how they may work. We conducted a narrative synthesis of research literature to identify mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external inspections.

METHODS

We performed a literature search (1980-January 2020) to identify empirical studies addressing change in healthcare organisations subject to external inspection. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we performed a narrative synthesis to identify mediators of change.

RESULTS

We included 95 studies. Accreditation was the most frequent type of inspection (n=68), followed by statutory inspections (n=19), and external peer review (n=9). Our findings suggest that the regulatory context in which the inspections take place affect how they are acted on by those being inspected. The way inspections are conducted seem to be critical for how the inspection findings are perceived and followed up. Inspections can engage and involve staff, facilitate leader engagement, improve communication and enable the creation of new networks for reflection on clinical practice. Inspections can contribute to creating an awareness of the inspected organisation's current practice and performance gaps, and a commitment to change. Moreover, they can contribute to facilitating the planning and implementation of change, as well as self-evaluation and the use of data to evaluate performance.

CONCLUSIONS

External inspections can affect different mediators of organisational change. The way and to what extent they do depend on a range of factors related to the outer setting, the way inspections are conducted and how they are perceived and acted on by the inspected organisation. To improve the quality of care, the organisational change processes need to involve and impact the way care is delivered to the patients.

Which Factors Influence the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Dutch Physiotherapy Practice? A Cross-Sectional Study

Purpose: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have the potential to enhance the quality of health care but, as a result of suboptimal implementation, it is unclear whether they fulfil this role in physiotherapy practice. This cross-sectional study aimed to identify the factors influencing PROM use in Dutch private physiotherapy practices. Method: A total of 444 physiotherapists completed a self-assessment questionnaire and uploaded the data from their electronic health record (EHR) systems to the national registry of outcome data. Univariate and multivariate ordinal logistic and linear regression analysis were used to identify the factors associated with self-reported PROM use and PROM use registered in the EHR systems, which were derived from the self-assessment questionnaire and from the data in the national registry, respectively. Five categories with nine independent variables were selected as potential factors for regression analysis. The similarity between self-reported and registered PROM use was verified. Results: On the basis of self-report and EHR report, we found that 21.6% and 29.8% of participants, respectively, used PROMs with more than 80% of their patients, and we identified the factors associated with PROM use. Conclusions: The factors associated with PROM use are EHR systems that support PROM use and more knowledge about PROM use. These findings can guide future strategies to enhance the use of PROMs in physiotherapy practice.

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.

Repeat Auditing of Primary Health-care Facilities Against Standards for Occupational Health and Infection Control: A Study of Compliance and Reliability

Background

The elevated risk of occupational infection such as tuberculosis among health workers in many countries raises the question of whether the quality of occupational health and safety (OHS) and infection prevention and control (IPC) can be improved by auditing. The objectives of this study were to measure (1) audited compliance of primary health-care facilities in South Africa with national standards for OHS and IPC, (2) change in compliance at reaudit three years after baseline, and (3) the inter-rater reliability of the audit.

Methods

The study analyzed audits of 60 primary health-care facilities in the Western Cape Province of South Africa. Baseline external audits in the time period 2011–2012 were compared with follow-up internal audits in 2014–2015. Audits at 25 facilities that had both internal and external audits conducted in 2014/2015 were used to measure reliability.

Results

At baseline, 25% of 60 facilities were “noncompliant” (audit score<50%), 48% “conditionally compliant” (score >50 < 80%), and only 27% “compliant” (score >80%). Overall, there was no significant improvement in compliance three years after baseline. Percentage agreement on specific items between internal and external audits ranged from 28% to 92% and kappa from -0.8 to 0.41 (poor to moderate).

Conclusion

Low baseline compliance with OHS–IPC measures and lack of improvement over three years reflect the difficulties of quality improvement in these domains. Low inter-rater reliability of the audit instrument undermines the audit process. Evidence-based investment of effort is required if repeat auditing is to contribute to occupational risk reduction for health workers.

Experiences of accreditation impact in general practice - a qualitative study among general practitioners and their staff

BACKGROUND

Accreditation is a widespread tool for quality management in health care. However, there is lack of research on the impact of accreditation, particularly in general practice. This study explores how general practitioners and their staff experienced the impact of a mandatory accreditation program in Denmark.

METHODS

Qualitative interviews with general practitioners and staff from 11 clinics. The respondents were interviewed twice: during preparation and after the survey visit. The interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis, and all specific changes and other types of impact were extracted from the transcribed interview data from each clinic.

RESULTS

The impact of accreditation varied markedly among the clinics as did the participants' overall assessments of accreditation. Concerning specific changes in behavior and physical infrastructure, some clinics had only implemented a few minor changes in response to accreditation, some had made a relatively moderate number of changes, and a few clinics had made relatively many changes including a few pronounced ones. Further, some participants experienced that accreditation had enhanced knowledge sharing or upgraded competencies, and increased job satisfaction. However, the workload related to accreditation was emphasized as a problem by a majority of the professionals and for a few, accreditation had influenced job satisfaction negatively.

CONCLUSION

Accreditation may affect general practice clinics in very different ways. In spite of several examples of positive impact, the results suggest that it is difficult to design a mandatory accreditation program for general practice in which most professionals experience that the benefits of accreditation equal the resources used in the process.

Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT): a new theory for designing, implementing, and evaluating feedback in health care based on a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research

BACKGROUND

Providing health professionals with quantitative summaries of their clinical performance when treating specific groups of patients ("feedback") is a widely used quality improvement strategy, yet systematic reviews show it has varying success. Theory could help explain what factors influence feedback success, and guide approaches to enhance effectiveness. However, existing theories lack comprehensiveness and specificity to health care. To address this problem, we conducted the first systematic review and synthesis of qualitative evaluations of feedback interventions, using findings to develop a comprehensive new health care-specific feedback theory.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar from inception until 2016 inclusive. Data were synthesised by coding individual papers, building on pre-existing theories to formulate hypotheses, iteratively testing and improving hypotheses, assessing confidence in hypotheses using the GRADE-CERQual method, and summarising high-confidence hypotheses into a set of propositions.

RESULTS

We synthesised 65 papers evaluating 73 feedback interventions from countries spanning five continents. From our synthesis we developed Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT), which builds on 30 pre-existing theories and has 42 high-confidence hypotheses. CP-FIT states that effective feedback works in a cycle of sequential processes; it becomes less effective if any individual process fails, thus halting progress round the cycle. Feedback's success is influenced by several factors operating via a set of common explanatory mechanisms: the feedback method used, health professional receiving feedback, and context in which feedback takes place. CP-FIT summarises these effects in three propositions: (1) health care professionals and organisations have a finite capacity to engage with feedback, (2) these parties have strong beliefs regarding how patient care should be provided that influence their interactions with feedback, and (3) feedback that directly supports clinical behaviours is most effective.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first qualitative meta-synthesis of feedback interventions, and the first comprehensive theory of feedback designed specifically for health care. Our findings contribute new knowledge about how feedback works and factors that influence its effectiveness. Internationally, practitioners, researchers, and policy-makers can use CP-FIT to design, implement, and evaluate feedback. Doing so could improve care for large numbers of patients, reduce opportunity costs, and improve returns on financial investments.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO, CRD42015017541.

Understanding accreditation standards in general practice - a qualitative study

Background

Accreditation is a widely adopted tool for quality control and quality improvement in health care, which has increasingly been employed for general practice. However, there is lack of knowledge of how accreditation is received and experienced by health professionals in general practice. This study explores how general practitioners (GPs) and their staff experienced the comprehensibility of accreditation standards and how they worked to increase their understanding of the standards. The study was conducted in Denmark where accreditation was mandatory in general practice from 2016 to 2018.

Methods

The study consists of qualitative interviews with general practitioners and staff from 11 general practices that were strategically sampled among practices set to receive their survey visit in 2017. Participants were interviewed twice; once during the preparation phase and once after the survey visit. GPs and staff were interviewed separately. The interviews were analysed inductively using thematic analysis.

Results

Understanding the requirements of the accreditation standards was a major challenge for the professionals when preparing for the accreditation survey visit. The participants attempted to increase their understanding of the standards in several ways including the use of regional support options and seeking out experts and colleagues. However, participants had mixed experiences with the various support options and many found the sense making work frustrating and time consuming.

Conclusion

The results point to the importance of considering the level of specificity in accreditation standards and how to ensure an organisational set-up that can offer appropriate support to primary care clinics in terms of understanding what is required to meet the standards.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0910-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluating the impact of accreditation on Brazilian healthcare organizations: A quantitative study

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of accreditation programs on Brazilian healthcare organizations.

Design

A web-based questionnaire survey was undertaken between February and May 2016.

Setting

Healthcare organizations from the Federal District and from 18 Brazilian states.

Participants

The quality managers of 141 Brazilian healthcare organizations were the main respondents of the study.

Intervention

The questionnaire was applied to not accredited and accredited organizations.

Main Outcome Measures

The main outcome measures were patient safety activities, quality management activities, planning activities-policies and strategies, patient involvement, involvement of professionals in the quality programs, monitoring of patient safety goals, organizational impact and financial impacts.

Results

The study identified 13 organizational impacts of accreditation. There was evidence of a significant and moderate correlation between the status of accreditation and patient safety activities, quality management activities, planning activities-policies and strategies, and involvement of professionals in the quality programs. The correlation between accreditation status and patient involvement was significant but weak, suggesting that this issue should be treated with a specific policy. The impact of accreditation on the financial results was not confirmed as relevant; however, the need for investment in the planning stage was validated.

Conclusions

The impact of accreditation is mainly related to internal processes, culture, training, institutional image and competitive differentiation.

Explaining the accreditation process from the institutional isomorphism perspective: a case study of Jordanian primary healthcare centers

BACKGROUND

While the main focus of accreditation initiatives has been on hospitals, the implementation of these programs is a relatively new notion among other types of healthcare facilities. Correspondingly, this study aims to understand how accreditation is perceived among primary public healthcare centers using an isomorphic institutional theory.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 56 healthcare professionals and administrative staff from seven non-profit healthcare centers in Jordan using an explanatory case-study approach.

RESULTS

The informants' narratives revealed that all three components of institutional theory: coercive, mimetic, and normative pressure, were drivers for institutional change in seeking accreditation. There was an overlapping and blending between the three various types of pressure. While participants perceived that healthcare centers faced formal and informal pressures to achieve accreditation, health centers were reluctant about the time, amount of effort, and their ability to achieve the accreditation. Ambiguity and fear of failure forced them to model successful ones. Moreover, the findings revealed that normative values of health professionals enhanced institutional isomorphism and influenced the accreditation process.

CONCLUSION

Identifying these isomorphic changes may help key stakeholders to develop plans, policies, and procedures that could improve the quality of healthcare and enhance accreditation as an organizational strategic plan. Moreover, the study provided explanations of why and how organizations move to adopt new interventions and grow over time. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.