Dataset Information

Development of a System Measurement Model of the Brazilian Hospital Accreditation System.

ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to develop and validate a measurement model that evaluates the Brazilian hospital accreditation methodology (ONA), based on a multivariate model using structural equation modeling (SEM). The information used to develop the model was obtained from a questionnaire sent to all organizations accredited by the ONA methodology. A model was built based on the data obtained and tested through a structural equation modeling (SEM) technique using the LISREL® software (Scientific Software International, Inc., Skokie, IL, USA). Four different tests were performed: Initial, calibrated, simulated, and cross-validation models. By analyzing and validating the proposed measurement model, it can be verified that the selected factors satisfy the required criteria for the development of a structural model. The results show that leadership action is one of the most important factors in the process of health services accredited by ONA. Although, leadership, staff management, quality management, organizational culture, process orientation, and safety are strongly linked to the development of health organizations, and directly influence the accreditation process.

SUBMITTER: Correa JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6266958 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development of a System Measurement Model of the Brazilian Hospital Accreditation System.

Corrêa João Éderson JÉ Turrioni João Batista JB Mello Carlos Henrique Pereira CHP Santos Ana Carolina Oliveira ACO da Silva Carlos Eduardo Sanches CES de Almeida Fabrício Alves FA

International journal of environmental research and public health 20181111 11

The purpose of this study is to develop and validate a measurement model that evaluates the Brazilian hospital accreditation methodology (ONA), based on a multivariate model using structural equation modeling (SEM). The information used to develop the model was obtained from a questionnaire sent to all organizations accredited by the ONA methodology. A model was built based on the data obtained and tested through a structural equation modeling (SEM) technique using the LISREL<sup>®</sup> softwar ...[more]

PMID: 30423866

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundA growing body of evidence supports the link between hospital organisational culture and health outcomes. Organisational culture is thus an essential consideration for hospital accreditation, a practice of systematically assessing the quality of hospital care against accepted standards. This study assesses the interplay between accreditation and hospital professional staff perception of organisational culture.MethodsA prospective cohort study design was used to explore the influence of accreditation on organisational culture within a large, publicly-funded, university teaching hospital in Hong Kong. All full-time hospital and academic physicians, nurses and allied health professionals were invited to participate. Organisational culture was evaluated using the Competing Values Framework through the Quality Improvement Implementation Survey. Organisational culture was assessed longitudinally at 9 months prior to accreditation, 3 months following and 15 months after accreditation. To capture potential shifts in staff perception of organisational culture through the accreditation process, we conducted a between time-point comparison using a linear trend model.Results545 clinical staff completed the organisational culture survey pre-accreditation, 378 three- months post-accreditation and 141 15-months post-accreditation. Hierarchical culture was the dominant organisational culture domain pre-accreditation, followed by rational, developmental and group culture, respectively. Following accreditation, hierarchical culture declined but remained dominant, while group and developmental culture increased. However, the decline in hierarchical culture was U-shaped with scores increasing at 15-months post-accreditation, though not to pre-accreditation levels. When stratified by professional group, hierarchical culture declined following accreditation with corresponding increases in group culture and developmental culture among physicians and nurses, respectively. While allied health professionals did not perceive any significant cultural differences directly following accreditation, a significant increase in hierarchical culture and corresponding decrease in group culture was found 15-months post-accreditation.ConclusionsThis study suggests the hospital accreditation process may contribute to shifts in staff perception of organisational culture. Our findings also indicate differential views of organisational culture across professional groups. Finally, we note the striking dominance of hierarchical culture in this Hong Kong hospital across all time points, far surpassing other studies, even those in which hierarchical culture prevailed.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the evidence upon which standards for hospital accreditation by The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (the Joint Commission) are based.DesignCross sectional study.SettingUnited States.ParticipantsFour Joint Commission R3 (requirement, rationale, and reference) reports released by July 2018 and intended to become effective between 1 July 2018 and 1 July 2019.InterventionsFrom each R3 report the associated standard and its specific elements of performance (or actionable standards) were extracted. If an actionable standard enumerated multiple requirements, these were separated into distinct components. Two investigators reviewed full text references, and each actionable standard was classified as either completely supported, partly supported, or not supported; Oxford evidence quality ratings were assigned; and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the strength of recommendations.Main outcome measureStrengths of recommendation for actionable standards.Results20 actionable standards with 76 distinct components were accompanied by 48 references. Of the 20 actionable standards, six (30%) were completely supported by cited references, six were partly supported (30%), and eight (40%) were not supported. Of the six directly supported actionable standards, one (17%) cited at least one reference of level 1 or 2 evidence, none cited at least one reference of level 3 evidence, and five (83%) cited references of level 4 or 5 evidence. Of the completely supported actionable standards, strength of recommendation in five was deemed GRADE D and in one was GRADE B.ConclusionsIn general, recent actionable standards issued by The Joint Commission are seldom supported by high quality data referenced within the issuing documents. The Joint Commission might consider being more transparent about the quality of evidence and underlying rationale supporting each of its recommendations, including clarifying when and why in certain instances it determines that lower level evidence is sufficient.

Project description:ObjectivesAccreditation in France relies on a mandatory 4-year cycle of self-assessment and a peer review of 82 standards, among which 14 focus priority standards (FPS). Hospitals are also required to measure yearly quality indicators (QIs-5 in 2010). On advice given by the accreditation committee of HAS (Haute Autorité en Santé), based on surveyors proposals and relying mostly on compliance to standards, accreditation decisions are taken by the board of HAS. Accreditation is still perceived by hospitals as a burdensome process and a simplification would be welcomed. The hypothesis was that a more limited number of criteria might give sufficient amount of information on hospitals overall quality level, appraised today by accreditation decisions.DesignThe accuracy of predictions of accreditation decisions given by a model, Partial Least Square-2 Discriminant Analysis (PLS2-DA), using only the results of FPS and QIs was measured. Accreditation decisions (full accreditation (A), recommendations or reservation (B), remit decision or non-accreditation (C)), results of FPS and QIs were considered qualitative variables. Stability was assessed by leave one out cross validation (LOOCV).Setting and participantsAll French 489 acute care organisations (ACO) accredited between June 2010 and January 2012 were considered, 304 of them having a rehabilitation care sector (RCS).ResultsAccuracy of prediction of accreditation decisions was good (89% of ACOs and 91% of ACO-RCS well classified). Stability of results appeared satisfactory when using LOOCV (87% of ACOs and 89% of ACO-RCS well classified). Identification of worse hospitals was correct (90% of ACOs and 97% of ACO-RCS predicted C were actually C).ConclusionsUsing PLS2-DA with a limited number of criteria (QIs and FPS) provides an accurate prediction of accreditation decisions, especially for underperforming hospitals. This could support accreditation committees which give advices on accreditation decisions, and allow fast-track handling of 'safe' reports.

Dataset Information

Development of a System Measurement Model of the Brazilian Hospital Accreditation System.

Publications

Development of a System Measurement Model of the Brazilian Hospital Accreditation System.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets