Examining challenges to reliability of health service accreditation during a period of healthcare reform in Australia

Author:

Greenfield David,Debono Deborah,Hogden Anne,Hinchcliff Reece,Mumford Virginia,Pawsey Marjorie,Westbrook Johanna,Braithwaite Jeffrey

Abstract

Purpose – Health systems are changing at variable rates. Periods of significant change can create new challenges or amplify existing barriers to accreditation program credibility and reliability. The purpose of this paper is to examine, during the transition to a new Australian accreditation scheme and standards, challenges to health service accreditation survey reliability, the salience of the issues and strategies to manage threats to survey reliability. Design/methodology/approach – Across 2013-2014, a two-phase, multi-method study was conducted, involving five research activities (two questionnaire surveys and three group discussions). This paper reports data from the transcribed group discussions involving 100 participants, which was subject to content and thematic analysis. Participants were accreditation survey coordinators employed by the Australian Council on Healthcare Standards. Findings – Six significant issues influencing survey reliability were reported: accreditation program governance and philosophy; accrediting agency management of the accreditation process, including the program’s framework; survey coordinators; survey team dynamics; individual surveyors; and healthcare organizations’ approach to accreditation. A change in governance arrangements promoted reliability with an independent authority and a new set of standards, endorsed by Federal and State governments. However, potential reliability threats were introduced by having multiple accrediting agencies approved to survey against the new national standards. Challenges that existed prior to the reformed system remain. Originality/value – Capturing lessons and challenges from healthcare reforms is necessary if improvements are to be realized. The study provides practical and theoretical strategies to promote reliability in accreditation programs.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Health Policy,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)

Reference28 articles.

1. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) (2011), “National Safety and Quality Health Service Standards”, ACSQHC, Sydney.

2. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (ACSQHC) (2012), “Australian Safety and Quality Goals for Health Care: Development and Consultation Report”, Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care, Sydney.

3. Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care (2014), “Information for Accrediting Agencies”, ACSQHC, Sydney, available at: www.safetyandquality.gov.au/our-work/accreditation-and-the-nsqhs-standards/information-for-accrediting-agencies/ (accessed April 28, 2014).

4. Braithwaite, J. , Matsuyama, Y. , Mannion, R. and Johnson, J. (2015), “Healthcare reform, quality and safety: perspectives, participants, partnerships and prospects in 30 countries”, Ashgate, Farnham.

5. Braithwaite, J. , Westbrook, J. , Johnston, B. , Clark, S. , Brandon, M. , Banks, M. , Hughes, C. , Greenfield, D. , Pawsey, M. , Corbett, A. , Georgiou, A. , Callen, J. , Øvretveit, J. , Pope, C. , Suñol, R. , Shaw, C. , Debono, D. , Westbrook, M. , Hinchcliff, R. and Moldovan, M. (2011), “Strengthening organizational performance through accreditation research: the ACCREDIT project BMC Research Notes , Vol. 4 No. 390, pp. 390-398.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3