Promoting patients’ rights through hospital accreditation

Sperling, Daniel; Pikkel, Rina B.

doi:10.1186/s13584-020-00405-1

Cited by 5 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rights of Service Recipients: One of the main categories in all accreditation programs is paying attention to patients' rights. Patients' rights are taken into account in accreditation; It may also provide effective tools for policymakers and patient support groups to inform physicians, patients, and their families about such rights and to promote and enforce them in the health care system (Sperling & Pikkel, 2020). Therefore, in the proposed framework, this category was divided into two subcategories: providing facilities for the service recipient and respecting the service recipient's rights, in which all patients' rights are considered.…”

Section: Technical Issues Of Accreditation Of Dental Clinicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proposing A Framework for Accreditation of Dental Clinics in Iran

Alaghemandan¹,

Ferdosi²,

Savabi³

et al. 2022

J Organ Behav Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accreditation is one of the important areas in evaluating health services. Some healthcare facilities have been accrediting including hospitals, outpatient centers like clinics, and rehabilitation centers. Therefore, considering the gap in the health system regarding the lack of a complete and comprehensive model for accreditation of dental clinics in Iran, the present study seeks to provide a model for accreditation of dental clinics in Iran. In this study, three accreditation structures were combined to develop a framework for the accreditation of dental clinics. They included the national accreditation model of Iran hospitals, the proposed model of accreditation of Iran outpatient clinics, and proposed standards for dental clinics in previous studies. Using a focus group discussion (FGD) method, the proposed model for accreditation of dental clinics in Iran was extracted. During four sessions of the FGD, experts presented the four main standard categories including leadership and management, care and treatment, rights of service givers, and special standards for dental clinics as the accreditation framework of dental clinics in Iran. It is crucial for different parts of the accreditation system to be consistent and even paired across the country. Then, in this study by combining three models of inpatient and outpatient accreditation in Iran and outpatient accreditation models in the top countries, a consistent model for accreditation of dental clinics in Iran is developed. One of the features of this model is the compatibility of the model with other accreditation models in Iran, which tends to decrease challenges in implementing this model.

show abstract

Section: Technical Issues Of Accreditation Of Dental Clinicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proposing A Framework for Accreditation of Dental Clinics in Iran

Alaghemandan¹,

Ferdosi²,

Savabi³

et al. 2022

J Organ Behav Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In their paper in the Israel Journal of Health Policy Research [ 2 ], Sperling and Pikkel present an analysis that provides important contributions to the answer to this question. The authors have examined the scope, contents, and definitions of patients’ rights in the Joint Commission International (JCI) Standards and compared them to patients’ rights as they are addressed and protected in national Israeli legislation.…”

Section: Main Textmentioning

confidence: 99%

Promoting patients’ rights through hospital accreditation

Engel

2020

Isr J Health Policy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Legislation and accreditation standards both address patients’ rights. The two approaches differ in important ways; they should not be seen as competing but as complementing efforts. Laws define minimum standards, whereas accreditation standards describe optimal performance; laws focus on the rights, whereas accreditation standards also point out ways in which hospitals may act to deliver these rights, which both serves to help hospitals implementing the rights and to standardize the measures taken across hospitals. A recent Israeli study underpins this view, but also highlights that international accreditation standards and national legislation may differ, when it comes to the definition of the actual rights.

show abstract

“…Informed consent is essential for patient autonomy, which is the patients' right to decide what will happen to their body and is a basic principle of medical ethics [6]. In Israel, the principle of informed consent is anchored in the Patients' Rights Law enacted in 1996, which states that medical treatment shall not be administered to the patient unless he/she has given his/her consent after being provided with all the necessary information, including the risks of the procedure [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Telling the whole truth to patients before hip fracture repair surgery. Cross sectional study.

Masarwa

Natan

Berkovich

2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Hip fracture repair surgery is associated with a certain mortality risk. However, there is evidence that orthopedic surgeons tend to refrain from discussing this issue with their patients prior to surgery. Aim To examine whether orthopedic surgeons raise the issue of one-year post-surgery mortality before hip fracture repair surgery. Moreover, this study examined factors related to the decision whether to inform patients of the mortality risk one-year post-surgery. Method The study is a cross sectional study, where validated digital questionnaires were administered to 150 orthopedic surgeons. Results A minority of the orthopedic surgeons reported that they always inform the patients of the risk of mortality in the year following a hip fracture surgery. The wish to avoid frightening the patient, lack of time, and the concern of causing patients to lose hope were found to be the most prevalent causes of not informing patients of the one-year risk of mortality after hip fracture repair surgery. Orthopedic surgeons reported a medium-high level of perceived self-efficacy. Higher self-efficacy was found to reduce the likelihood that the orthopedic surgeon would inform the patient of the one-year mortality risk after hip fracture surgery. Moreover, older age and being an expert were found to increase the likelihood that the surgeon would inform the patient of the one-year mortality risk after hip fracture surgery. Conclusions It seems that orthopedic surgeons tend to refrain from revealing to their patients the issue of mortality following hip fracture repair surgery, conduct that appears to be affected by personal, professional, and organizational factors. It is necessary to raise the awareness of orthopedic surgeons regarding this tendency. As part of their studies, medical students should be given tools for dealing with these barriers. Trial registration The study doesn`t reports the results of a health care intervention.

show abstract

Promoting patients’ rights through hospital accreditation

Cited by 5 publications

References 39 publications

Proposing A Framework for Accreditation of Dental Clinics in Iran

Proposing A Framework for Accreditation of Dental Clinics in Iran

Promoting patients’ rights through hospital accreditation

Telling the whole truth to patients before hip fracture repair surgery. Cross sectional study.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About