Strengthening the Value of Accreditation: Qmentum - One Year Later

Nicklin, Wendy; Lanteigne, Gilles; Greco, Paula

doi:10.12927/hcq.2013.20882

Cited by 4 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Each year the accreditation workshop at the ISQua international quality conference draws together practitioners and researchers from around the world to consider current developments and challenges associated with healthcare accreditation programs [43]. Discussions have centred upon all aspects of accreditation programs, for example: implementation of accreditation programs [44,45]; maintaining standards of accreditation programs [46]; survey methodologies [47,48]; linking standards to clinical indicators [49]; processes used to develop standards [50]; and the public disclose of accreditation results [51,52]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The standard of healthcare accreditation standards: a review of empirical research underpinning their development and impact

Greenfield

Pawsey

Hinchcliff

et al. 2012

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHealthcare accreditation standards are advocated as an important means of improving clinical practice and organisational performance. Standard development agencies have documented methodologies to promote open, transparent, inclusive development processes where standards are developed by members. They assert that their methodologies are effective and efficient at producing standards appropriate for the health industry. However, the evidence to support these claims requires scrutiny. The study’s purpose was to examine the empirical research that grounds the development methods and application of healthcare accreditation standards.MethodsA multi-method strategy was employed over the period March 2010 to August 2011. Five academic health research databases (Medline, Psych INFO, Embase, Social work abstracts, and CINAHL) were interrogated, the websites of 36 agencies associated with the study topic were investigated, and a snowball search was undertaken. Search criteria included accreditation research studies, in English, addressing standards and their impact. Searching in stage 1 initially selected 9386 abstracts. In stage 2, this selection was refined against the inclusion criteria; empirical studies (n = 2111) were identified and refined to a selection of 140 papers with the exclusion of clinical or biomedical and commentary pieces. These were independently reviewed by two researchers and reduced to 13 articles that met the study criteria.ResultsThe 13 articles were analysed according to four categories: overall findings; standards development; implementation issues; and impact of standards. Studies have only occurred in the acute care setting, predominately in 2003 (n = 5) and 2009 (n = 4), and in the United States (n = 8). A multidisciplinary focus (n = 9) and mixed method approach (n = 11) are common characteristics. Three interventional studies were identified, with the remaining 10 studies having research designs to investigate clinical or organisational impacts. No study directly examined standards development or other issues associated with their progression. Only one study noted implementation issues, identifying several enablers and barriers. Standards were reported to improve organisational efficiency and staff circumstances. However, the impact on clinical quality was mixed, with both improvements and a lack of measurable effects recorded.ConclusionStandards are ubiquitous within healthcare and are generally considered to be an important means by which to improve clinical practice and organisational performance. However, there is a lack of robust empirical evidence examining the development, writing, implementation and impacts of healthcare accreditation standards.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The standard of healthcare accreditation standards: a review of empirical research underpinning their development and impact

Greenfield

Pawsey

Hinchcliff

et al. 2012

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The accreditation program has been introduced as one of the most valid hospital evaluation methods in the world . The development of this program has enabled most health systems to benefit from the optional or mandatory deployment of accreditation …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, Salmon et al (2003) and Braithwaite et al (2010) show that accreditation is a process that improves performance and increases positive health outcomes in patients . Studies by Nicklin (2008) and El‐Jardali et al (2008) show that accreditation leads to continuity in quality improvement and the performance of services . The study of Ava in Abdol Aziz hospitals in 2011 indicated that indexes of hospitals' performance increased after the accreditation compared with before it .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3 The development of this program has enabled most health systems to benefit from the optional or mandatory deployment of accreditation. [4][5][6] In Iran, the Office of Monitoring and Accreditation at the Ministry of Health is responsible for evaluating and monitoring health activities across the country. In this capacity, it has implemented various models in the country over the last few years.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13,14 Studies by Nicklin (2008) and El-Jardali et al (2008) show that accreditation leads to continuity in quality improvement and the performance of services. 6,15 The study of Ava in Abdol Aziz hospitals in 2011 indicated that indexes of hospitals' performance increased after the accreditation compared with before it. 15 Studies by Mays (2004), Sutherland andLeatherman (2006(, andSunol et al (2009) refer to accreditation as a stimulant for quality improvement.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations