The purpose of this paper is to identify and suggest a number of performance measures to facilitate the evaluation of accreditation programs in healthcare.
The paper is based on an exploratory research which has used qualitative methods, including snowball sampling technique, email interview and thematic content analysis.
Respondents (experts and professionals) were selected from a diverse spectrum ranging from healthcare organizations, universities and accreditation-associated institutions.
The analysis of the data provided key measures to be considered in the evaluation of accreditation programs' impact at macro and micro levels as well as their nature and operations. The measures can be used to, for example, assess the degree of stakeholders' reliance on accreditation results, measure the cost of accreditation for participating organizations and serve as a formal mechanism for accredited organizations to appeal accreditation decisions.
This paper has brought together a number of generic, yet influential and workable, measures which could be utilized for assessing the overall performance of an accreditation program in healthcare. The application of these measures depends on the features of given accreditation program and the context in which the program operates. Therefore, the next step/steps in the assessment of an accreditation program might be choosing the measures suiting that program.
"For over two decades, the healthcare industry internationally has sought ways of describing the nature, volume, complexity, costs, and outcomes of its services, to deal with increasing consumer demand, ballooning healthcare costs, and tightening financial constraints [3,4]. Standardized assessments of healthcare performance have been widely implemented internationally via accreditation standards, benchmarks, and/or key performance indicators [5-8]. However, the challenging issue remains of what does ‘healthcare quality’ look like? "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There is no standard way of describing the complexities of allied health (AH) care, or its quality. AH is an umbrella term which excludes medicine and nursing, and variably includes disciplines which provide therapy, diagnostic, or scientific services. This paper outlines a framework for a standard approach to evaluate the quality of AH therapy services.
A realist synthesis framework describing what AH does, how it does it, and what is achieved, was developed. This was populated by the findings of a systematic review of literature published since 1980 reporting concepts of quality relevant to AH. Articles were included on quality measurement concepts, theories, debates, and/or hypothetical frameworks.
Of 139 included articles, 21 reported on descriptions of quality potentially relevant to AH. From these, 24 measures of quality were identified, with 15 potentially relating to what AH does, 17 to how AH delivers care, 8 relating to short term functional outcomes, and 9 relating to longer term functional and health system outcomes.
A novel evidence-based quality framework was proposed to address the complexity of AH therapies. This should assist in better evaluation of AH processes and outcomes, costs, and evidence-based engagement of AH providers in healthcare teams.
Health Research Policy and Systems 02/2014; 12(1):10. DOI:10.1186/1478-4505-12-10 · 1.86 Impact Factor
"This abundance has as such made the choice of an appropriate model difficult for most of HCOs. Comparison of various QMSs, as in the current study, could render a performance assessment of the QMSs (41) and explore the strengths and weaknesses of these models making the selection to some extent easier for the organizations. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) model is a widely used quality management system (QMS) worldwide, including Iran. Current study aims to verify the quality assessment results of Iranian National Program for Hospital Evaluation (INPHE) based on those of EFQM.
This cross-sectional study was conducted in 2012 on a sample of emergency departments (EDs) affiliated with Tehran University of Medical Sciences (TUMS), Iran. The standard questionnaire of EFQM (V-2010) was used to gather appropriate data. The results were compared with those of INPHE. MS Excel was used to classify and display the findings.
The average assessment score of the EDs based on the INPHE and EFQM model were largely different (i.e. 86.4% and 31%, respectively). In addition, the variation range among five EDs' scores according to each model was also considerable (22% for EFQM against 7% of INPHE), especially in the EDs with and without prior record of applying QMSs.
The INPHE's assessment results were not confirmed by EFQM model. Moreover, the higher variation range among EDs' scores using EFQM model could allude to its more differentiation power in assessing the performance comparing with INPHE. Therefore, a need for improvement in the latter drawing on other QMSs' (such as EFQM) strengths, given the results emanated from its comparison with EFQM seems indispensable.
Iranian Journal of Public Health 06/2013; 42(6):610-9. · 0.55 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There has been considerable interest in the theory and practice of organisation change. Similarly there has been a great deal of attention given to the processes that lead to and result from accounting change within organisations. There has also been a more limited interest in the interaction and interrelationship between these two literatures. In this paper we explore these different literatures and provide a perspective on this extensive research. The contents are not intended to be a systematic summary of this voluminous literature but rather a recounting of our own views on how we have engaged with this material, as a precursor to thoughts on a future research agenda for these important issues. The paper starts by posing four questions related to organisational and accounting change, the answers to which circumscribe how these themes can be approached theoretically and empirically. Based on our answers to these questions we then move into perspectives on understanding organisations, understanding organisational change and understanding accounting change within an organisational change context. From this analysis the paper concludes with some suggestions on a possible future research agenda on these important organisational issues.
Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change 12/2004; 1(1):7-25. DOI:10.1108/EUM0000000007302
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.