جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « accreditation » در نشریات گروه « پزشکی »

Accreditation is a systematic evaluation process of health services that evaluates health organizations based on approved standards to determine their quality. A qualitative study exploring the experiences of trauma center nursing managers regarding the accreditation program can help in better evaluation. The purpose of this study was to explain the experiences of trauma center nursing managers concerning the hospital accreditation process.

This research applied the content analysis method to explain the experiences of trauma center nursing managers in hospital accreditation. We used Lincoln and Guba's approach for data analysis. Sampling was done purposefully from November 2021 to January 2022 by voluntary nursing administrators. Finally, sixteen interviews were held with 14 participants.

After analyzing the interviews, 398 main codes, 5 main categories, and 13 sub-categories were extracted as a hospital accreditation process. The five main categories included a low balance of cooperation in the treatment team, accreditation standards issues, immaturity of treatment systems, management issues in accreditation, and bias in the evaluation.

The results show that trauma centers need to make significant changes in the use of accreditation as a quality certificate tool. It seems necessary to plan for management processes, evaluation, standards, and structure and infrastructure issues.

One of the upcoming challenges in hospital accreditation is using the same and similar standards for all types of hospitals in size and type of activity. We aimed to identify the accreditation modules for all types of hospitals in size (small hospitals) and type of activity (special hospitals).

This research was conducted as a scoping review from Mar to May 2023. "Arsky and O'Malley" six-step protocol was used to conduct this study. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) was used to identify, evaluate, and select research articles. The "framework analysis" method was used to analyze the data.

Of 14 articles, 64% have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. Moreover, 36% of them were accreditation organizations' standards at the national level. The accreditation modules of small hospitals are Responsibilities of Management, Care of Patients, Management of Medication, Patient Safety, Infection Control, Continuous Quality Improvement, Patient Rights and Education, Blood and Blood Products, and Partnering with Consumers. The accreditation modules of special hospitals are Governing Body and Administration, Clinical Management, Prevention and Health, Care and Treatment, Diagnostic Services, Patient Rights, and Quality Improvement.

Identifying the main modules of accreditation for small and special hospitals can help policymakers and hospital managers improve the quality and safety of their hospitals by using appropriate standards and help improve the services provided to patients and increase their satisfaction.

In Iran’s accreditation program, the patient safety dimension is one of the main dimensions, holding the highest weight among the accreditation criteria. The purpose of this study was to identify the patient safety culture (PSC) in a tertiary referral hospital.

The current study was conducted between March and April 2021 in a tertiary hospital in Iran. The sample size was 628 participants, selected through simple random sampling. The hospital survey on patient safety culture (HSOPSC) was used to assess provider and staff perceptions about patient safety issues, medical errors, and event reporting. The survey included 32 items that measure 10 dimensions of PSC. Normality tests, along with non-parametric Mann-Whitney and Kruskal-Wallis tests, were used to examine the relationship between PSC and demographic variables using SPSS 22 software.

Based on current findings, among the 10 dimensions of PSC, teamwork and organizational learning-continuous improvement received the highest scores (83% positive response), which were higher than these variables in the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) data. Conversely, staffing and work pace, as well as hospital management support for patient safety, received the lowest positive scores (43% and 55% positive response, respectively), which were lower than these variables in the AHRQ data. There was a significant positive relationship between dimensions of PSC and older age, female gender, staff with longer working experience, and longer work hours per week (P < 0.05).

The majority of our participants felt that patient safety needs to be enhanced. Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended to emphasize the dimensions of “staffing and work pace” and “hospital management support for patient safety” more in the accreditation criteria to strengthen these dimensions in hospitals. Additionally, we have introduced a comprehensive guide for using an international tool to measure PSC, which hospitals can use to succeed in annual accreditation.

Over the past three decades, healthcare organizations have prioritized enhancing patient care quality (1). The Institute of Medicine (IoM) has highlighted that most medical errors stem from flawed systems and processes rather than individual actions (2). Consequently, initiatives to improve processes and safety in healthcare have explored various quality improvement (QI) methodologies, including healthcare accreditation programs (1). Accreditation is a systematic process that evaluates a healthcare organization’s compliance against pre-defined peer review standards, which are structural, procedural, and outcomeoriented (3). Assessments are undertaken by various governmental or non-governmental entities, using different modalities in voluntary or mandatory approaches. The scope of accreditation may encompass the entire health organization, individual hospitals, health facilities, only a specialty, or even a sub-specialty (4). Accreditation standards cover diverse domains including clinical governance and patient-centeredness, with the consequences of failing to meet these standards variable across different health system contexts (5). First proposed and implemented by the American College of Surgeons in 1917, accreditation has since undergone numerous transformations and adaptations.

Accreditation and ISO 9001 programs in hospitals are widely adopted for quality control and quality improvement in healthcare.

The objective of this study is to identify stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences regarding the implementation of accreditation and ISO 9001 programs in hospitals affiliated with the Social Security Organization in Alborz Province, Iran.

In this qualitative study, participants were selected based on purposive sampling. For data collection, semi-structured one-to-one interviews were conducted with hospital staff in different positions (n = 30). All interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using thematic analysis.

Based on the analysis, 10 primary themes and 88 subthemes were identified. The 10 primary themes were categorized as experiences, strengths, weaknesses, effective factors, and recommendations for the implementation of accreditation and ISO 9001 programs in hospitals. Proper planning, benchmarking, physician involvement, increased resources, and more training are suggested for the successful implementation of accreditation in hospitals. Additionally, fostering a positive culture, focusing on the executive dimension, changing managerial attitudes, training, and supporting and motivating staff are the most important recommendations for the implementation of the ISO 9001 program.

The results provide important insights into the dimensions of implementing accreditation and ISO programs in hospitals, which can be used by health policymakers and managers to improve the implementation of these programs in Iranian hospitals.

Accreditation means systematic evaluation of health service centers with specific standards. One of the most important goals of the accreditation process is to improve patient safety. Patient safety visits are one of the most important standards for improving safety. One of the ways to increase the effectiveness of visits is holding feedback sessions.

The present study was conducted with the aim of assessing the effect of feedback provision on improving patient safety indices based on the hospital accreditation model in Shahid Rahnemoon Hospital, Yazd.

The present study is a semi-experimental study with a before-and-after design that was conducted in Shahid Rahnemoon Hospital, Yazd, from September to December 2021 and January to August 2022. After each visit, formal feedback sessions were held with the attendance of patient safety team members and officials of the visited wards/units. Evaluation indicators included patient safety indicators in accreditation standards, such as error reporting, rate of unwanted events, and patient safety culture score. These were measured before and after feedback. The tools used were the patient safety standards evaluation checklist based on the accreditation model, the patient safety culture questionnaire, and other indicators extracted using documentation. The Patient Safety Culture Evaluation Questionnaire was completed by 360 nurses working in the hospital in the form of a census. Analysis was done using descriptive statistical tests and paired t-tests with STATA 14.2 software.

Based on the results of the study, safety feedback was provided to increase patient safety indicators in different departments and units of hospitals [t = - 4.8652, w/df = 10, P = 0.0007, (P = 0.05)]. A significant difference was observed in the amount of error reporting (P = 0.031) and patient safety (P < 0.001) before and after the intervention. The degree of compliance with the dimensions of the patient safety culture had a statistically significant difference before and after the intervention (P < 0.001).

Providing a safety feedback program had a significant positive effect on the cons umption and consequences of the patient’s safety culture. Therefore, conducting regular safety visits and setting up a direct feedback program to each department/unit after the visit, and the follow-up of corrective measures, will lead to an increase in patient safety standards.

Hospital health service quality is a fundamental component of the health system. Hospital accreditation is a key approach to enhancing this quality, necessitating the correct implementation of processes.

This study aims to investigate the compliance of the executive processes of Iran’s hospital accreditation program with the requirements of the International Society for Quality in Health Care and to provide corrective solutions.

This qualitative study uses an inductive content analysis technique. A checklist with seven axes was established by extracting and interpreting the requirements of the executive processes from the International Society for Quality in Health Care. By examining existing documents at the Ministry of Health’s Accreditation Office and conducting interviews with managers and experts in the field, challenges in the domain of the executive processes of Iran’s hospital accreditation program were identified using the relevant checklist. Corrective solutions were then gathered through semi-structured interviews with 19 experts, managers, and accreditation field specialists, categorized inductively, and presented using MAXQDA software.

Challenges in seven areas were identified, including governance; strategic, operational and financial management; risk management; human resources management; information management; survey and client management; and the granting of accreditation approval. Subsequently, solutions were categorized into five groups encompassing 26 concepts, focusing on reforming macro policies, addressing implementation challenges, fostering appropriate interactions, improving human resource management, and promoting evidence-based decision-making.

The Iran hospital accreditation program’s adherence to International Society for Quality in Health Care standards is inadequate. Establishing a semi-autonomous, non-profit accreditation body that operates under government control and ensuring the independence of the accreditation office is essential for achieving higher compliance and receiving certification from International Society for Quality in Health Care.

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.

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.

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.

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

The quality of education and accreditation of universities, institutions, and Educational centers has always been of great concern to many groups, including managers, officials, students, parents, and employers, in the past hundred years. The current research aimed to design the accreditation model of applied science higher education institutions.

This qualitative research was conducted using qualitative content analysis. Its statistical population includes articles, documents, and all the key informants of applied science higher education institutions in Tehran. A total of 21 key informants were selected using the purposive and snowball sampling method and maximum diversity technique. The data were collected by semi-structured interview, observation, review of documents and scientific texts and analyzed by using MAXQDA-2022 software and weighting of factors, criteria, and indicators with the Shannon entropy method and prioritization with RANK function in Excel.

The results demonstrated that after weighting and prioritizing, the final research model included 33 factors, 101 criteria, and 704 indicators. There are 27 input factors, 4 process factors, 1 output factor and 1 outcome factor.

The current accreditation model was prepared in accordance with the conditions of applied science higher education institutions using domestic and international experiences with a systemic approach (input, process, output, and outcome) in the form of factors, criteria, and indicators and can be used by University of Applied Science and Technology.

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.

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.

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).

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.

Context: 

Hospital accreditation (HA) is the systematic evaluation of the accepted standards by an independent organization, which consists of specialized and skilled people to improve the safety and quality of health‑care providers.

 This study was conducted to explore HA challenges from nursing managers’ viewpoints.

Settings and Design:

 This qualitative study was conducted by a content analysis approach.

 Twelve nursing managers of one hospital were recruited by the purposive sampling method. Data were collected through focus group discussions and also unstructured and deep interviews

Statistical Analysis Used: 

Conventional content analysis was performed. Rigor‘s study was done through credibility and confirmability, transferability, and dependability.

 During the analyzing process, the 3 main themes and 11 sub‑themes including “negative emotions toward the process of evaluation (stress on staff, ignoring the staff, and “evaluator’s negative view),” “inappropriate evaluation procedure (nonprofessional performance of evaluators and inappropriate metrics scoring),” and “increased workload (lack of personnel and overdocumentation)” emerged.

 Nursing managers experienced some enhancement over three courses of HA but their experiences revealed some barriers, which are thought‑provoking. Considering these challenges by the Ministry of Health and accreditation units of medical universities can facilitate the implementation of HA.