医院认证模式的可持续性:一项横断面研究。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Mohammed Hussein, Milena Pavlova, Wim Groot
{"title":"医院认证模式的可持续性:一项横断面研究。","authors":"Mohammed Hussein, Milena Pavlova, Wim Groot","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzaf017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the importance of hospital accreditation, its sustainability is jeopardized. This is due to the disparity between the rapid changes in the health sector and the accreditation standards that remain unchanged. This study aims to examine what improvements are important in enhancing the sustainability of the hospital accreditation model in Saudi Arabia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All quality managers in accredited Saudi Arabian hospitals were invited to participate in a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study in July-August 2022. A structured questionnaire was developed, tested, piloted, and factorially validated using exploratory factor analysis. On a 5-point Likert scale, respondents were asked to rate the importance of recommended changes that are proposed to enhance the sustainability of accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team. The importance of the recommendations, according to the respondents, was described using the relative importance index, while multivariate linear regression was used to analyse the association with independent variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 158 valid questionnaires (64% response rate) were included in the analysis. On average, participants had 6.9 (SD 2.1) years of experience in quality management. The overall mean importance attached to improving standards development, accreditation policies, evaluation team, and evaluation methods were 3.55, 3.43, 3.41, and 3.21, on a 5-point scale, respectively. Shifting the focus of accreditation standards from structure and compliance to outcomes and improvement (mean importance = 4.47), updating standards periodically to reflect current best practices and research (mean importance = 4.41), and integrating consumer perspectives in all aspects of accreditation (mean importance = 4.37) were the most important perceived recommendations. Multivariate regression analysis yielded that managers with more years of experience had significantly higher mean scores on the importance of improving accreditation policies (β = 0.120, P = .037), standards development (β = 0.246, P < .001), evaluation methods (β = 0.268, P < .001), and the evaluation team (β = 0.369, P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Improving accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team are important in enhancing the sustainability of hospital accreditation programmes. This study offers insights to assist policymakers and other stakeholders in redesigning traditional accreditation models to make them more sustainable and that can supplement other performance improvement tools in improving the quality of healthcare services.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11908374/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The sustainability of hospital accreditation models: a cross-sectional study.\",\"authors\":\"Mohammed Hussein, Milena Pavlova, Wim Groot\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/intqhc/mzaf017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the importance of hospital accreditation, its sustainability is jeopardized. This is due to the disparity between the rapid changes in the health sector and the accreditation standards that remain unchanged. This study aims to examine what improvements are important in enhancing the sustainability of the hospital accreditation model in Saudi Arabia.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All quality managers in accredited Saudi Arabian hospitals were invited to participate in a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study in July-August 2022. A structured questionnaire was developed, tested, piloted, and factorially validated using exploratory factor analysis. On a 5-point Likert scale, respondents were asked to rate the importance of recommended changes that are proposed to enhance the sustainability of accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team. The importance of the recommendations, according to the respondents, was described using the relative importance index, while multivariate linear regression was used to analyse the association with independent variables.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 158 valid questionnaires (64% response rate) were included in the analysis. On average, participants had 6.9 (SD 2.1) years of experience in quality management. The overall mean importance attached to improving standards development, accreditation policies, evaluation team, and evaluation methods were 3.55, 3.43, 3.41, and 3.21, on a 5-point scale, respectively. Shifting the focus of accreditation standards from structure and compliance to outcomes and improvement (mean importance = 4.47), updating standards periodically to reflect current best practices and research (mean importance = 4.41), and integrating consumer perspectives in all aspects of accreditation (mean importance = 4.37) were the most important perceived recommendations. Multivariate regression analysis yielded that managers with more years of experience had significantly higher mean scores on the importance of improving accreditation policies (β = 0.120, P = .037), standards development (β = 0.246, P < .001), evaluation methods (β = 0.268, P < .001), and the evaluation team (β = 0.369, P < .001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Improving accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team are important in enhancing the sustainability of hospital accreditation programmes. This study offers insights to assist policymakers and other stakeholders in redesigning traditional accreditation models to make them more sustainable and that can supplement other performance improvement tools in improving the quality of healthcare services.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for Quality in Health Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11908374/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for Quality in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf017\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzaf017","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管医院认证的重要性,其可持续性受到威胁。这是由于卫生部门的迅速变化与保持不变的认证标准之间存在差异。本研究旨在研究哪些改进对提高沙特阿拉伯医院认证模式的可持续性很重要。方法:于2022年7 - 8月邀请沙特阿拉伯认可医院的所有质量管理人员参加横断面问卷调查。使用探索性因素分析开发、测试、试点和因素验证了一份结构化问卷。在5分李克特量表上,受访者被要求对建议的变化的重要性进行评级,这些变化旨在增强认证政策、标准制定、评估方法和评估团队的可持续性。根据受访者的说法,建议的重要性是用相对重要性指数来描述的,而多元线性回归是用来分析与自变量的关联的。结果:共回收有效问卷158份,回复率64%。参与者平均有6.9年(SD 2.1)的质量管理经验。改善标准制定、认可政策、评估团队和评估方法的总体平均重要性分别为3.55、3.43、3.41和3.21(满分为5分)。将认证标准的重点从结构和合规性转移到结果和改进(平均重要性=4.47),定期更新标准以反映当前的最佳实践和研究(平均重要性=4.41),以及在认证的各个方面整合消费者的观点(平均重要性=4.37)是最重要的建议。多元回归分析结果显示,经验越丰富的管理者在改进认可政策(β=0.120, P =0.037)和标准制定(β=0.246, P)的重要性上的平均得分越高。结论:改进认可政策、标准制定、评估方法和评估团队对提高医院认可项目的可持续性具有重要意义。本研究为政策制定者和其他利益相关者重新设计传统认证模式提供了见解,使其更具可持续性,并可以补充其他绩效改进工具,以提高医疗保健服务的质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The sustainability of hospital accreditation models: a cross-sectional study.

Background: Despite the importance of hospital accreditation, its sustainability is jeopardized. This is due to the disparity between the rapid changes in the health sector and the accreditation standards that remain unchanged. This study aims to examine what improvements are important in enhancing the sustainability of the hospital accreditation model in Saudi Arabia.

Methods: All quality managers in accredited Saudi Arabian hospitals were invited to participate in a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study in July-August 2022. A structured questionnaire was developed, tested, piloted, and factorially validated using exploratory factor analysis. On a 5-point Likert scale, respondents were asked to rate the importance of recommended changes that are proposed to enhance the sustainability of accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team. The importance of the recommendations, according to the respondents, was described using the relative importance index, while multivariate linear regression was used to analyse the association with independent variables.

Results: A total of 158 valid questionnaires (64% response rate) were included in the analysis. On average, participants had 6.9 (SD 2.1) years of experience in quality management. The overall mean importance attached to improving standards development, accreditation policies, evaluation team, and evaluation methods were 3.55, 3.43, 3.41, and 3.21, on a 5-point scale, respectively. Shifting the focus of accreditation standards from structure and compliance to outcomes and improvement (mean importance = 4.47), updating standards periodically to reflect current best practices and research (mean importance = 4.41), and integrating consumer perspectives in all aspects of accreditation (mean importance = 4.37) were the most important perceived recommendations. Multivariate regression analysis yielded that managers with more years of experience had significantly higher mean scores on the importance of improving accreditation policies (β = 0.120, P = .037), standards development (β = 0.246, P < .001), evaluation methods (β = 0.268, P < .001), and the evaluation team (β = 0.369, P < .001).

Conclusions: Improving accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team are important in enhancing the sustainability of hospital accreditation programmes. This study offers insights to assist policymakers and other stakeholders in redesigning traditional accreditation models to make them more sustainable and that can supplement other performance improvement tools in improving the quality of healthcare services.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.80%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Quality in Health Care makes activities and research related to quality and safety in health care available to a worldwide readership. The Journal publishes papers in all disciplines related to the quality and safety of health care, including health services research, health care evaluation, technology assessment, health economics, utilization review, cost containment, and nursing care research, as well as clinical research related to quality of care. This peer-reviewed journal is truly interdisciplinary and includes contributions from representatives of all health professions such as doctors, nurses, quality assurance professionals, managers, politicians, social workers, and therapists, as well as researchers from health-related backgrounds.
×
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