Value and impact of international hospital accreditation: a case study from Jordan

Halasa, Y.A.; Zeng, W.; Chappy, E.; Shepard, D.S.

doi:10.26719/2015.21.2.90

Cited by 21 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, accredited hospitals tended to have better baseline performance compared to nonaccredited peer facilities, as evidenced by publicly reported quality measures, and these differences in quality tend to become more pronounced over time. Likewise in a 4-year retrospective study conducted by Halasa et al 7 in Jordan, the JCI accreditation process may have improved several aspects of patient care, including a reduction in return to ICU within 24 hours of ICU discharge, reduction in staff turnover, and completeness of the medical records. These improvements translated into total savings of US$593 000 in Jordan’s health-care system.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perception of hospital accreditation among health professionals in Saudi Arabia

Algahtani

Aldarmahi

Manlangit

et al. 2017

Annals of Saudi Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDHospital accreditation assesses hospital performance against explicit standards. Studies of the efficacy of accreditation are limited, but suggest that Joint Commission International (JCI) accreditation is efficient in improving the safety and quality of care in accredited hospitals.OBJECTIVESThis study aimed to assess the perceptions of health professionals on the impact of JCI accreditation and implementation of change towards the delivery of quality patient care.DESIGNCross-sectional survey.SETTINGSKing Abdulaziz Medical City in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.SUBJECTSBetween June 2016 and September 2016, a validated questionnaire was distributed to physicians, nurses, medical technologists, dietitians, and other allied healthcare professionals. The questionnaire consisted of 19 items covering participation in accreditation, benefits of accreditation, and the quality of results of accreditation. Demographic data collected on the participants included age, gender, educational attainment, profession, length of service, and department.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)Participation in accreditation, benefits of accreditation, and quality of results of accreditation.RESULTSHospital accreditation was given a worthy response from the general view of 901 health professionals. The mean (standard deviation) of scores on a 5-point Likert scale were 3.79 (0.68) for participation in accreditation, 3.85 (0.84) for benefits, and 3.54 (1.01) for quality of results.CONCLUSIONAs perceived by health professionals in our survey, accrediation had a positive impact on the process and implementation of change in the hospital that resulted in improvement in the delivery of patient care and other health services.LIMITATIONSSingle institution study with no comparison made to other small, medium, or large-sized JCI-accredited hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Patient satisfaction before and after accreditation was not included.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perception of hospital accreditation among health professionals in Saudi Arabia

Algahtani

Aldarmahi

Manlangit

et al. 2017

Annals of Saudi Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both physicians and nurses had positive perceptions of accreditation standards related to management and leadership, strategic planning for quality, human resources utilization, quality management, and accreditation process and implementation [ 51 ]. Moreover, compared to non-accredited Jordanian hospitals, return of patients to the intensive care unit within 24 days of discharge and staff turnover have both decreased in accredited hospitals (albeit those accredited by Joint Commission International (JCI)), with subsequent cost saving of US $38,588 and US $33,333, respectively [ 52 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of national policies and strategies to improve quality of health care and patient safety: a case study from Lebanon and Jordan

El‐Jardali

Fadlallah

2017

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundImproving quality of care and patient safety practices can strengthen health care delivery systems, improve health sector performance, and accelerate attainment of health-related Sustainability Development Goals. Although quality improvement is now prominent on the health policy agendas of governments in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), including countries of the Eastern Mediterranean Region (EMR), progress to date has not been optimal. The objective of this study is to comprehensively review existing quality improvement and patient safety policies and strategies in two selected countries of the EMR (Lebanon and Jordan) to determine the extent to which these have been institutionalized within existing health systems.MethodsWe used a mixed methods approach that combined documentation review, stakeholder surveys and key informant interviews. Existing quality improvement and patient safety initiatives were assessed across five components of an analytical framework for assessing health care quality and patient safety: health systems context; national policies and legislation; organizations and institutions; methods, techniques and tools; and health care infrastructure and resources.ResultsBoth Lebanon and Jordan have made important progress in terms of increased attention to quality and accreditation in national health plans and strategies, licensing requirements for health care professionals and organizations (albeit to varying extents), and investments in health information systems. A key deficiency in both countries is the absence of an explicit national policy for quality improvement and patient safety across the health system. Instead, there is a spread of several (disjointed) pieces of legal measures and national plans leading to fragmentation and lack of clear articulation of responsibilities across the entire continuum of care. Moreover, both countries lack national sets of standardized and applicable quality indicators for performance measurement and benchmarking. Importantly, incentive systems that link contractual agreement, regulations, accreditation, and performance indicators are underutilized in Lebanon and absent in Jordan. At the healthcare organizational level, there is a need to instill a culture of continuous quality improvement and promote professional training in quality improvement and patient safety.ConclusionStudy findings highlight the importance of aligning policies, organizations, methods, capacities and resources in order to institutionalize quality improvement and patient safety practices in health systems. Gaps and dysfunctions identified can help inform national deliberations and dialogues among key stakeholders in each study country. Findings can also inform future quality improvement efforts in the EMR and beyond, with a particular emphasis on LMICs.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2528-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…Of the five JCI measures used, three demonstrated a positive impact on the accredited hospitals’ finances: a reduction in returns to the intensive care unit (ICU) within 24 hours of ICU discharge, a reduction in staff turnover and the completeness of medical records all showed statistically significant effects in the accredited organizations. Over 3 years, these hospitals saved a total of US $593 000 …”

Section: The Study Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nurses’ views of organizational readiness for change

Mrayyan

2019

Nurs Forum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: "Organizational readiness for change" is critical to successfully managing change in healthcare organizations. Yet healthcare and nursing studies about this relatively new concept are few and lack clear criteria on what comprises "organizational readiness for change." Purpose: This study assessed organizational (hospital) readiness for change, as perceived by registered nurses in two types of hospital in Jordan. Methods: Using a quantitative research design, the researcher collected data from a convenience sample of 153 nurses from one major government hospital and one major private hospital. The response rate was 64%. Results: The lowest means, indicating unreadiness for change, were reported for the following items: having developed plans for expanding ambulatory care or enhancing continuity of care, including nurses on all committees, and involving them in policy development and strategic planning efforts. The only difference between the types of hospitals in terms of readiness for change was the use of "collaboration and multidisciplinary work": the governmental hospital was more ready than the private hospital in this regard. Implications for practice and nurse leaders: To prepare for change, nurse leaders should initiate interventions to enhance organizational readiness and facilitate the integration of change, such as continuing education courses for staff and focus on teamwork, open communication, total quality management, strategic planning, advanced nursing practice and participatory management, especially shared decisionmaking and policy development. Successful leaders support employees' creative ideas, focus on the timing of the change, and provide training on change management.

show abstract

Value and impact of international hospital accreditation: a case study from Jordan

Cited by 21 publications

References 13 publications

Perception of hospital accreditation among health professionals in Saudi Arabia

Perception of hospital accreditation among health professionals in Saudi Arabia

A review of national policies and strategies to improve quality of health care and patient safety: a case study from Lebanon and Jordan

Nurses’ views of organizational readiness for change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About