ABSTRACT Objectives: to analyze the knowledge produced regarding the practice environment in hospitals with quality improvement programs. Methods: integrative literature review performed in the Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences databases, US National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL, consisting in 10 articles. Results: data were presented and discussed using categories: Measures for the professional nursing practice environment; Hospital accreditation as an improvement program; Nursing autonomy, interpersonal relationship between nurse and doctor and the nurse as a manager and leader. Final Considerations: it was possible to analyze that the influence of quality improvement programs can be considered as favorable in the professional nursing practice environment. The survey also brings contributions to administration in implementing strategies aiming at continuous improvement in the environment characteristics.
BACKGROUND: Accreditation is viewed as a reputable tool to evaluate and enhance the quality of health care. However, its effect on performance and outcomes remains unclear. This review aimed to identify and analyze the evidence on the impact of hospital accreditation.
METHODS: We systematically searched electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EMBASE, MEDLINE (OvidSP), CDSR, CENTRAL, ScienceDirect, SSCI, RSCI, SciELO, and KCI) and other sources using relevant subject headings. We included peer-reviewed quantitative studies published over the last two decades, irrespective of its design or language. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, two reviewers independently screened initially identified articles, reviewed the full-text of potentially relevant studies, extracted necessary data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using a validated tool. The accreditation effects were synthesized and categorized thematically into six impact themes.
RESULTS: We screened a total of 17,830 studies, of which 76 empirical studies that examined the impact of accreditation met our inclusion criteria. These studies were methodologically heterogeneous. Apart from the effect of accreditation on healthcare workers and particularly on job stress, our results indicate a consistent positive effect of hospital accreditation on safety culture, process-related performance measures, efficiency, and the patient length of stay, whereas employee satisfaction, patient satisfaction and experience, and 30-day hospital readmission rate were found to be unrelated to accreditation. Paradoxical results regarding the impact of accreditation on mortality rate and healthcare-associated infections hampered drawing firm conclusions on these outcome measures.
CONCLUSION: There is reasonable evidence to support the notion that compliance with accreditation standards has multiple plausible benefits in improving the performance in the hospital setting. Despite inconclusive evidence on causality, introducing hospital accreditation schemes stimulates performance improvement and patient safety. Efforts to incentivize and modernize accreditation are recommended to move towards institutionalization and sustaining the performance gains. PROSPERO registration number CRD42020167863.
BACKGROUND: Since 2009, hospital quality policy in Flanders, Belgium, is built around a quality-of-care triad, which encompasses accreditation, public reporting (PR) and inspection. Policy makers are currently reflecting on the added value of this triad.
METHODS: We performed a narrative review of the literature published between 2009 and 2020 to examine the evidence base of the impact accreditation, PR and inspection, both individually and combined, has on patient processes and outcomes. The following patient outcomes were examined: mortality, length of stay, readmissions, patient satisfaction, adverse outcomes, failure to rescue, adherence to process measures and risk aversion. The impact of accreditation, PR and inspection on these outcomes was evaluated as either positive, neutral (i.e. no impact observed or mixed results reported) or negative.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the current evidence base on the impact of accreditation, PR and inspection on patient processes and outcomes.
RESULTS: We identified 69 studies, of which 40 were on accreditation, 24 on PR, three on inspection and two on accreditation and PR concomitantly. Identified studies reported primarily low-level evidence (level IV, n = 53) and were heterogeneous in terms of implemented programmes and patient populations (often narrow in PR research). Overall, a neutral categorization was determined in 30 articles for accreditation, 23 for PR and four for inspection. Ten of these recounted mixed results. For accreditation, a high number (n = 12) of positive research on adherence to process measures was discovered.
CONCLUSION: The individual impact of accreditation, PR and inspection, the core of Flemish hospital quality, was found to be limited on patient outcomes. Future studies should investigate the combined effect of multiple quality improvement strategies.
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.
The American Society for Bariatric Surgery established a set of standards for bariatric surgery Centers of Excellence accreditation programme in 2003. While several research efforts have shown that post-bariatric surgery outcomes were poorer in unaccredited as compared to accredited hospitals, others have questioned the same. This research effort sought to use random effects meta-analysis to quantitatively summarize the existing research efforts analysing this association, which were published between January 2000 and October 2018. Out of the total 559 articles, 13 that quantitatively analysed the effect of accreditation on post-operative mortality- and morbidity-related outcomes were included in the analysis. Overall, the weighted pooled estimates showed that compared to accredited, in the unaccredited hospitals, the odds of mortality were twice as high (odds ratio: 1.83; confidence interval: 1.49, 2.25), and those for morbidity were 1.23 times higher (1.11, 1.36). Estimates varied by the data source used, and the effect estimate used (odds or risk ratios). Overall, the odds of poor post-operative outcomes were higher among unaccredited hospitals as compared to accredited. However, there were analytic differences and other limitations among the existing efforts. Future research efforts conducting independent analyses on these data sources, keeping the methodology consistent are needed.
Journal»International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences
Year»2020
Loading references information
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.
Hospital accreditation has been transferred from high-income countries (HICs) to many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), supported by a variety of advocates and donor agencies. This review uses a policy transfer theoretical framework to present a structured analysis of the development of hospital accreditation in LMICs. The framework is used to identify how governments in LMICs adopted accreditation from other settings and what mechanisms facilitated and hindered the transfer of accreditation. The review examines the interaction between national and international actors, and how international organizations influenced accreditation policy transfer. Relevant literature was found by searching databases and selected websites; 78 articles were included in the analysis process. The review concludes that accreditation is increasingly used as a tool to improve the quality of healthcare in LMICs. Many countries have established national hospital accreditation programmes and adapted them to fit their national contexts. However, the implementation and sustainability of these programmes are major challenges if resources are scarce. International actors have a substantial influence on the development of accreditation in LMICs, as sources of expertise and pump-priming funding. There is a need to provide a roadmap for the successful development and implementation of accreditation programmes in low-resource settings. Analysing accreditation policy processes could provide contextually sensitive lessons for LMICs seeking to develop and sustain their national accreditation programmes and for international organizations to exploit their role in supporting the development of accreditation in LMICs.
PURPOSE: To systematically review the impact of hospital accreditation on healthcare quality indicators, as classified into seven healthcare quality dimensions.
DATA SOURCE: We searched eight databases in June 2020: EBSCO, PubMed, Web of Science, Emerald, Proquest, Science Direct, Scopus, and Virtual Health Library. Search terms were conceptualized into three groups: hospitals, accreditation, and terms relating to healthcare quality. The eligibility criteria included academic articles that applied quantitative methods to examine the impact of hospital accreditation on healthcare quality indicators.
DATA EXTRACTION: We applied the PICO framework to select the articles according to the following criteria: Population - all types of hospitals; Intervention - hospital accreditation; Comparison - quantitative method applied to compare accredited vs. non-accredited hospitals, or hospitals before vs. after accreditation; Outcomes - regarding the seven healthcare quality dimensions. After a critical appraisal of the 943 citations initially retrieved, 36 studies were included in this review.
RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Overall results suggest that accreditation may have a positive impact on efficiency, safety, effectiveness, timeliness, and patient-centeredness. In turn, only one study analyzes the impact on access, and no study has investigated the impact on equity dimension yet.
CONCLUSION: Mainly due to the methodological shortcomings, the positive impact of accreditation on healthcare dimensions should be interpreted with caution. This study provides an up-to-date overview of the main themes examined in the literature, highlighting critical knowledge-gaps and methodological flaws. The findings may provide value to healthcare stakeholders in terms of improving their ability to assess the relevance of accreditation processes.
OBJECTIVE: As the number of Magnet hospitals continues to rise in the United States and abroad, the body of literature regarding various outcomes at Magnet hospitals is increasing also. A systematic review examining and compiling the most recent evidence would be invaluable to those seeking to pursue Magnet recognition for their facility. We conducted this systematic review to investigate how Magnet hospital status affects outcomes for nursing professionals, patients, and health care organizations.
METHODS: In January 2018, the databases CINAHL, ProQuest, PubMed, and La Biblioteca Cochrane Plus were searched for relevant studies. The reference lists of selected articles were also examined to identify additional studies. The PRISMA statement was followed, and established methods for systematic review were used to produce a narrative summary. The quality of the reviewed studies was assessed according to the 22-item Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist for observational studies.
RESULTS: Of the 163 studies identified, 21 met the eligibility criteria and are included in this review. On the whole, lower rates of nursing shortages, burnout, job dissatisfaction, and turnover were observed at Magnet hospitals compared with non-Magnet hospitals. The rates of patient mortality, falls, hospital-acquired infections, and pressure ulcers were also lower. Nursing work environments were found to be safer and were associated with a higher quality of care in Magnet hospitals than in non-Magnet hospitals, and Magnet hospitals were found to provide more cost-effective care.
CONCLUSION: This review provides nursing managers and administrators with the most recent evidence demonstrating that Magnet hospitals have better nursing work environments and are associated with better outcomes for nurses, patients, and organizations than non-Magnet hospitals. This evidence should inform future decision-making with regard to pursuing Magnet designation.
OBJECTIVE: To review and analyze the impact of hospital accreditation on quality of care.
METHOD: We reviewed articles of the hospital accreditation impact on quality of care which had been published in English and Indonesian from 2008 to 2018. Comprehensive searches were conducted in the online databases of ProQuest, CINAHL and ScienceDirect.
RESULTS: A total of 11 articles were reviewed. We found that the hospital accreditation impacted the quality of care through improved quality of management (81.81%), improved employee participation (27.27%), and improved quality of results (54.54%). The articles studied nurses and other health workers with consideration on their work experience, education, and age.
CONCLUSIONS: Hospital accreditation has positive impact in improving the quality of services provided in the hospitals. The greatest impact was reflected by the hospitals that had been accredited by the Joint Commission International. The perceptions on which the studies were based came from various health care personnel and were not limited to professional nurses. Therefore, further research is needed to understand the impact of accreditation on the quality of care from the nurses' perception.
ABSTRACT Objectives: to analyze the knowledge produced regarding the practice environment in hospitals with quality improvement programs. Methods: integrative literature review performed in the Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences databases, US National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health, Web of Science, Scopus and CINAHL, consisting in 10 articles. Results: data were presented and discussed using categories: Measures for the professional nursing practice environment; Hospital accreditation as an improvement program; Nursing autonomy, interpersonal relationship between nurse and doctor and the nurse as a manager and leader. Final Considerations: it was possible to analyze that the influence of quality improvement programs can be considered as favorable in the professional nursing practice environment. The survey also brings contributions to administration in implementing strategies aiming at continuous improvement in the environment characteristics.
