Determination of Gap in Accreditation Standards Establishment Process Using Zachman Framework at a Health-Educational Hospital

S. Asefzadeh, J. Mamikhani, E. Navvabi
{"title":"Determination of Gap in Accreditation Standards Establishment Process Using Zachman Framework at a Health-Educational Hospital","authors":"S. Asefzadeh, J. Mamikhani, E. Navvabi","doi":"10.17795/BHS-38779","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Accreditation is usually a voluntary plan supported by a non-governmental institution and trained evaluators that examine the competency of organizations providing health service according to pre-specified performance standards. Objectives: The current study aimed to determine the degree of establishment of accreditation standards using logical framework of Zachman. Methods: This descriptive research was conducted during year 2015. The population of the study included people involved in the establishment of accreditation standards. Sampling was conducted in the form of complete enumeration according to 36 standards of accreditation. The instrument used for data collection was the “Logical framework of Zachman”. Columns of framework consisted of people involved in conducting the work (Who), the purpose of the work (Why), strategy of the work (What), work time (When), and sub-system of doing work (Where) and way of doing work (How), and rows of framework included the view of hospital chief, director/assistants of hospital, officials and personnel. Test chi-square was used to compare between accreditation standards text and studied hospital gap. Descriptive statistical method was used for variables. Results: People involved in doing work and sub-systems of doing work at the hospital were consistent with specified accreditation standards. In 27% of the standards, time interval of doing work in the hospital was not conducted according to accreditation standards. In terms of way of doing work, 25% of standards had not been established, and 26% of them had been established incompletely. During interviews, it was found that 59% of personnel of purpose of doing work, and 94% of them are not informed about the strategy of doing work, according to accreditation standards in the hospital. Conclusions: Uncertainties in the accreditation standards in dimensions of purpose, people involved, strategy and time interval of doing work, respectively, led to a lack of understanding the intention of author/developers of standards by personnel. As a result, this led to lack of complete establishment of accreditation standards in the studied hospital. Keywords: Accreditation, Establishment, Gap, Hospitals, Tehran","PeriodicalId":8849,"journal":{"name":"Biotechnology and Health Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biotechnology and Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17795/BHS-38779","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

Background: Accreditation is usually a voluntary plan supported by a non-governmental institution and trained evaluators that examine the competency of organizations providing health service according to pre-specified performance standards. Objectives: The current study aimed to determine the degree of establishment of accreditation standards using logical framework of Zachman. Methods: This descriptive research was conducted during year 2015. The population of the study included people involved in the establishment of accreditation standards. Sampling was conducted in the form of complete enumeration according to 36 standards of accreditation. The instrument used for data collection was the “Logical framework of Zachman”. Columns of framework consisted of people involved in conducting the work (Who), the purpose of the work (Why), strategy of the work (What), work time (When), and sub-system of doing work (Where) and way of doing work (How), and rows of framework included the view of hospital chief, director/assistants of hospital, officials and personnel. Test chi-square was used to compare between accreditation standards text and studied hospital gap. Descriptive statistical method was used for variables. Results: People involved in doing work and sub-systems of doing work at the hospital were consistent with specified accreditation standards. In 27% of the standards, time interval of doing work in the hospital was not conducted according to accreditation standards. In terms of way of doing work, 25% of standards had not been established, and 26% of them had been established incompletely. During interviews, it was found that 59% of personnel of purpose of doing work, and 94% of them are not informed about the strategy of doing work, according to accreditation standards in the hospital. Conclusions: Uncertainties in the accreditation standards in dimensions of purpose, people involved, strategy and time interval of doing work, respectively, led to a lack of understanding the intention of author/developers of standards by personnel. As a result, this led to lack of complete establishment of accreditation standards in the studied hospital. Keywords: Accreditation, Establishment, Gap, Hospitals, Tehran
利用Zachman框架确定某健康教育医院认证标准制定过程中的差距
背景:认证通常是一项自愿计划,由非政府机构和经过培训的评估人员支持,根据预先规定的绩效标准审查提供保健服务的组织的能力。目的:本研究旨在利用Zachman的逻辑框架确定认证标准的建立程度。方法:本描述性研究于2015年进行。研究对象包括参与制定认证标准的人员。抽样采用全枚举形式,按照36项认可标准进行抽样。用于数据收集的工具是“Zachman逻辑框架”。框架栏由参与工作的人(Who)、工作目的(Why)、工作策略(What)、工作时间(When)、工作子系统(Where)和工作方式(How)组成,框架栏由院长、院长/助理、官员和人员的观点组成。采用卡方检验比较认可标准文本与研究医院差距。变量采用描述性统计方法。结果:医院工作人员和工作分系统均符合规定的认可标准。在27%的标准中,在医院工作的时间间隔没有按照认可标准进行。在工作方式方面,25%的标准没有建立,26%的标准建立不完全。在采访中发现,根据医院的认证标准,59%的工作人员知道工作的目的,其中94%的人不知道工作的策略。结论:认可标准在目的维度、参与人员维度、策略维度和工作时间间隔维度上的不确定性,导致工作人员对标准作者/开发者的意图缺乏理解。因此,这导致所研究的医院缺乏完整的认证标准。关键词:认证,机构,Gap,医院,德黑兰
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信