Search published articles
Showing 7 results for Accreditation
F Farzianpoor , A Bazargan ,
Volume 57, Issue 2 (5-1999)
Volume 57, Issue 2 (5-1999)
Abstract
The present research evaluated the teaching of treatment hospitals of medical sciences universities in Tehran. The aim of research was a clinical diagnosis on particular nature of medical specialty, sub specialty fields promoting the quality of medical education and offering special services in teaching hospitals in comparison with standard measurements. An effective method in recognizing the strong and weak points of teaching and treatment services in teaching hospitals is choosing the Accreditation Model, that played a great role in this research. The steps to perform the model are as follows: 1) At the beginning, the medical education system criteria was mentioned according to model consisting of five parts: input-process-intermediate output-final input and outcome. The evaluation factors are: 1- Managing, treatment, teaching and research sections. 2- The theoretical, practical and experties of the faculty members. 3- The educational progress of assistants. 4- Resources, facilities, equipment and financial services in teaching of treatment center. 5- The ability to carryout teaching of treatment and clinical projects. 6- Patient satisfaction. 2) To determine if the variables are standard, the national and international documents (teaching standards of Cebec, Canada) were studied to compare the standards to the medical education system in medical hospitals. The viewpoints of board of directors in teaching hospitals were gathered. At last, the final model was devised according to the viewpoints and the final standard confirmed, 96.7% positive votes. 3) To determine the percentage role of evaluation factors, called the basis the investigation forms were filled by the managers of the hospitals according to interview and Delphi technique. The importance of each basis was investigated and confirmed in two stages in teaching hospitals in Tehran and all over Iran, according to the information. 4) According to the standards, many questions were constructed. The board of directors in teaching of treatment sections in every selected hospital determined the rank of each criteria on the hospital where they worked. After gathering the data by the investigator and determining the grades, the following linear-formula will be applied and the criteria to judge a teaching hospital on its credibility will be available. Y=a1x1+a2x2+... akxk. 5) Based on the data collected and the application of the linear formula, the hospitals in the study proved to comply with the accreditation standards. They were rated as satisfactory.
Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad , Ali Akbari Sari , Taraneh Yousefinezhadi ,
Volume 75, Issue 4 (7-2017)
Volume 75, Issue 4 (7-2017)
Abstract
Background: Hospital accreditation is a systematic external evaluation of a hospital’s structures, processes and results (outputs/ outcome) by an independent professional accreditation body using pre-established optimum standards. Hospital accreditation has an important role in improving the quality, safety, effectiveness and efficacy of health care services. The effectiveness of an accreditation system depends on the quality and conformity of its methods, standards and surveyors. This study aimed to evaluate the hospital accreditation method from the perspective of Iranian hospital managers.
Methods: This descriptive, applied and cross-sectional study was carried out in 2015 using a valid and reliable questionnaire. The study population consisted of 914 hospital managers. Overall 547 hospital managers were surveyed through stratified random sampling. SPSS software was used for data analysis.
Methods: This descriptive, applied and cross-sectional study was carried out in 2015 using a valid and reliable questionnaire. The study population consisted of 914 hospital managers. Overall 547 hospital managers were surveyed through stratified random sampling. SPSS software was used for data analysis.
| Results: Almost 71.7 percent of hospitals achieved grade one and above in the first round of national accreditation survey. The mean score of managers’ satisfaction of hospital accreditation method was 3.21±0.63 out of 5 (Average). About 38 percent of hospital managers were satisfied with the hospital accreditation method. Most complaints were related to lack of reliability among surveyors and their low knowledge, skills and experience. Hospital managers were satisfied with surveyors’ attitude and adequacy of the number of survey days. Hospital managers mostly believed that accreditation is better to be done by Ministry of Health, compulsory, and every two years. About 95 percent of hospital managers agreed that self-assessment is necessary and beneficial prior to the accreditation survey. Conclusion: Hospital managers were moderately satisfied with the national accreditation system. Developing job description and person specification for accreditation surveyors and recruiting them accordingly, and providing professional education and training for them help improve the effectiveness of Iranian hospital accreditation method. The method of hospital accreditation in Iran has to be changed. Self-assessment, unannounced surveys, review of hospital key performance indicators and patient satisfaction surveys should be added to the current scheduled on-site surveys to enhance the credibility of the accreditation result. |
Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad , Ali Akbari-Sari , Taraneh Yousefinezhadi ,
Volume 76, Issue 5 (8-2018)
Volume 76, Issue 5 (8-2018)
Abstract
Background: Hospital accreditation is a systematic external evaluation of a hospital’s structures, processes and results by an independent professional accreditation body using pre-established optimum standards. This study aimed to evaluate the hospital accreditation system.
Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out between November 2015 and February 2016 using a questionnaire covering accreditation standards, methods, surveyors, implementation and effects. The study population consisted of 161 hospital managers in Tehran province, Iran. Overall 87 hospital managers were surveyed through stratified random sampling.
Results: The mean score of managers’ satisfaction of hospital accreditation system was 2.93 out of 5 score. About 16 percent of managers were satisfied with the hospital accreditation system. Hospital managers were most satisfied with accreditation effects (3.14) and least satisfied with accreditation standards (2.54). Hospital managers were satisfied with surveyors’ attitude, number of survey days and the number of surveyors in the accreditation team. They were least satisfied with the lack of consistency among surveyors, lack of transparency of standards, too many standards and low competency of surveyors. Hospital managers mostly believed that accreditation should be done by Ministry of Health, compulsory, and every two years. About 97 percent of managers agreed that self-assessment is necessary and beneficial prior to the accreditation survey.
Conclusion: Accreditation was moderately successful in Tehran hospitals. Accreditation had the most effect on improving patient safety and meeting patients' rights and least effect on improving employees' job satisfaction and involving doctors in quality improvement. Strengthening Iran hospital accreditation system, training managers and employees on implementing standards, and providing necessary resources make it possible to achieve accreditation goals.
Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out between November 2015 and February 2016 using a questionnaire covering accreditation standards, methods, surveyors, implementation and effects. The study population consisted of 161 hospital managers in Tehran province, Iran. Overall 87 hospital managers were surveyed through stratified random sampling.
Results: The mean score of managers’ satisfaction of hospital accreditation system was 2.93 out of 5 score. About 16 percent of managers were satisfied with the hospital accreditation system. Hospital managers were most satisfied with accreditation effects (3.14) and least satisfied with accreditation standards (2.54). Hospital managers were satisfied with surveyors’ attitude, number of survey days and the number of surveyors in the accreditation team. They were least satisfied with the lack of consistency among surveyors, lack of transparency of standards, too many standards and low competency of surveyors. Hospital managers mostly believed that accreditation should be done by Ministry of Health, compulsory, and every two years. About 97 percent of managers agreed that self-assessment is necessary and beneficial prior to the accreditation survey.
Conclusion: Accreditation was moderately successful in Tehran hospitals. Accreditation had the most effect on improving patient safety and meeting patients' rights and least effect on improving employees' job satisfaction and involving doctors in quality improvement. Strengthening Iran hospital accreditation system, training managers and employees on implementing standards, and providing necessary resources make it possible to achieve accreditation goals.
Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad , Ali Akbari Sari , Taraneh Yousefinezhadi,
Volume 76, Issue 12 (3-2019)
Volume 76, Issue 12 (3-2019)
Abstract
Background: Hospital accreditation is an external evaluation of a hospital’s structures, processes and results by an independent professional accreditation body using pre-established optimum standards. Accreditation has an important role in improving the quality, safety, effectiveness and efficiency of hospital services. This study aimed to examine the effects of hospital accreditation program from hospitals managers’ perspective.
Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out in 2015 using a valid and reliable questionnaire designed to examine accreditation effects on hospital performance, hospital employees, patients, and the society. The study population consisted of 914 hospital managers in Iran. Overall, 547 hospital managers were surveyed through stratified random sampling.
Results: About 71% of hospitals achieved grade one and above accreditation status. The mean score of accreditation positive effects in hospitals was 3.16±0.66 out of 5 (Average). Almost 38% of managers were satisfied with the accreditation results in their hospitals. Hospital accreditation program was successful in improving patient and staff safety, reducing medical errors and enhancing staff competencies. Its success in improving communication, promoting organizational culture, continuous quality improvement, resource utilization, and reducing nosocomial infections and hospital mortality rates was moderate. Accreditation was less successful in improving staff satisfaction, getting physicians involved in process improvement, practicing evidence based medicine, attracting patients and increasing hospital income. A statistically significant correlation was found between hospital size and accreditation results (P=0.038, r=-0.090). There was no correlation between using quality management models and getting better accreditation results (P=0.085). However, there was correlation between using accreditation consultants and positive accreditation results (P=0.045, r=-0.087). Utilizing hospital resources, organizational learning, continuous quality improvement and effective communication had the most effect on accreditation success.
Conclusion: The accreditation program had a moderate effect on hospital performance. It is costly to implement accreditation standards in hospitals. Hence, changes should be made to the accreditation system including accreditation standards and methods in order to have more positive effects on the staff and hospitals’ performance.
Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out in 2015 using a valid and reliable questionnaire designed to examine accreditation effects on hospital performance, hospital employees, patients, and the society. The study population consisted of 914 hospital managers in Iran. Overall, 547 hospital managers were surveyed through stratified random sampling.
Results: About 71% of hospitals achieved grade one and above accreditation status. The mean score of accreditation positive effects in hospitals was 3.16±0.66 out of 5 (Average). Almost 38% of managers were satisfied with the accreditation results in their hospitals. Hospital accreditation program was successful in improving patient and staff safety, reducing medical errors and enhancing staff competencies. Its success in improving communication, promoting organizational culture, continuous quality improvement, resource utilization, and reducing nosocomial infections and hospital mortality rates was moderate. Accreditation was less successful in improving staff satisfaction, getting physicians involved in process improvement, practicing evidence based medicine, attracting patients and increasing hospital income. A statistically significant correlation was found between hospital size and accreditation results (P=0.038, r=-0.090). There was no correlation between using quality management models and getting better accreditation results (P=0.085). However, there was correlation between using accreditation consultants and positive accreditation results (P=0.045, r=-0.087). Utilizing hospital resources, organizational learning, continuous quality improvement and effective communication had the most effect on accreditation success.
Conclusion: The accreditation program had a moderate effect on hospital performance. It is costly to implement accreditation standards in hospitals. Hence, changes should be made to the accreditation system including accreditation standards and methods in order to have more positive effects on the staff and hospitals’ performance.
Zahra Imanian, Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad, Mojtaba Amiri , Mohsen Ghadami , Robert McShery,
Volume 77, Issue 1 (4-2019)
Volume 77, Issue 1 (4-2019)
Abstract
Background: Hospital accreditation is an external evaluation of a hospital’s structures, processes and results by an independent professional accreditation body using pre-established optimum standards. Hospital accreditation has an important role in improving quality, safety, effectiveness and efficiency of hospital services. A generic questionnaire is usually used to accredit all hospitals. However, specific instruments should be used for evaluation and accreditation of specialized hospitals considering their unique nature and specific requirements. Thus, this study aimed to develop an accreditation model for children hospitals.
Methods: A mixed method approach was used for such a descriptive and cross-sectional study. First, using a comparative study, accreditation standards and measurement criteria of children friendly hospitals were extracted from 10 well-known hospital evaluation and accreditation models and initiatives. Second, complementary interviews with 57 hospitals senior, middle and front line managers and pediatrics doctors and nurses were conducted to identify more children friendly hospital accreditation standards and measurement criteria. Third, children friendly hospital accreditation standards and criteria were modified considering the Iranian context. Finally, five pediatrics doctors reviewed, modified, finalized and confirmed accreditation standards and criteria.
Results: The Iranian framework for accreditation of children-friendly hospitals was consisted of ten standards covering management and leadership, planning and policy making, education, patient management, employee management, resource management, process management, patients’, employees’ and organization results and 132 measuring criteria. Such a systemic framework covers pediatrics hospitals’ structures, processes, outputs and outcomes. A children friendly hospital achieves better results for employees and patients through strong management and leadership, proper planning and policy making, continuous education and training staff and patients and effective management of employees, patients, resources and processes.
Conclusion: The proposed children-friendly hospitals accreditation model can be used for evaluation and accreditation of children hospitals and provide a clear picture of the performance of these hospitals.
Methods: A mixed method approach was used for such a descriptive and cross-sectional study. First, using a comparative study, accreditation standards and measurement criteria of children friendly hospitals were extracted from 10 well-known hospital evaluation and accreditation models and initiatives. Second, complementary interviews with 57 hospitals senior, middle and front line managers and pediatrics doctors and nurses were conducted to identify more children friendly hospital accreditation standards and measurement criteria. Third, children friendly hospital accreditation standards and criteria were modified considering the Iranian context. Finally, five pediatrics doctors reviewed, modified, finalized and confirmed accreditation standards and criteria.
Results: The Iranian framework for accreditation of children-friendly hospitals was consisted of ten standards covering management and leadership, planning and policy making, education, patient management, employee management, resource management, process management, patients’, employees’ and organization results and 132 measuring criteria. Such a systemic framework covers pediatrics hospitals’ structures, processes, outputs and outcomes. A children friendly hospital achieves better results for employees and patients through strong management and leadership, proper planning and policy making, continuous education and training staff and patients and effective management of employees, patients, resources and processes.
Conclusion: The proposed children-friendly hospitals accreditation model can be used for evaluation and accreditation of children hospitals and provide a clear picture of the performance of these hospitals.
Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad, Ghasem Janbabai , Behzad Kalantari, Mahnaz Afshari, Hamed Dehnavi ,
Volume 79, Issue 5 (8-2021)
Volume 79, Issue 5 (8-2021)
Abstract
Background: Hospital accreditation is a systematic external evaluation of a hospital's structures, processes, and outcomes by an independent professional accreditation body using published optimum, evidence‐based, and achievable standards. Accreditation is a strategy for ensuring the quality, safety, and productivity of hospital services. Implementing accreditation standards imposes a high cost on hospitals. Therefore, this cost should be offset by increased hospital efficiency. Hence, this study aimed to examine the relationship between the Iranian public hospitals’ efficiency and their accreditation status.
Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was conducted in May 2019. The efficiency of general hospitals in Iran was assessed using the Pabon Lasso chart and three performance indicators of bed occupancy rate, average patient length of stay and hospital bed turnover. Then, the relationship between the efficiency of hospitals and their accreditation grade was examined. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA tests were used for data analysis using SPSS software.
Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was conducted in May 2019. The efficiency of general hospitals in Iran was assessed using the Pabon Lasso chart and three performance indicators of bed occupancy rate, average patient length of stay and hospital bed turnover. Then, the relationship between the efficiency of hospitals and their accreditation grade was examined. Descriptive statistics and ANOVA tests were used for data analysis using SPSS software.
|
Results: There were 834 general hospitals with 108,275 active beds in Iran in 2018. The Iranian general hospitals had an average bed occupancy of 62.8%, an average patient length of stay of 2.6 days, and an average bed turnover of 93.4 times. Almost 15.3% of the hospitals performed well and were located in area 3 of the Pabon Lasso chart. About 36.1% and 48.6% of the hospitals had moderate and low efficiency, respectively. Approximately, 74% and 21% of hospitals had the accreditation status of 1 and 2, respectively. There was a significant relationship between the degree of accreditation of hospitals with their bed occupancy, bed turnover and bed turnover interval.
Conclusion: The efficiency of public hospitals is low. A hospital accreditation grade is related to some of its efficiency indicators. Low efficiency and waste of resources will reduce the effectiveness of hospital and, consequently, its accreditation grade. Accordingly, the hospital's revenue will decrease and therefore, the hospital's productivity and accreditation grade will decrease and the hospital will be in a vicious cycle. Strengthening hospital accreditation standards and their proper implementation will increase the efficiency of hospitals. |
Masoumeh Abbasabadi-Arab , Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad , Hamid Reza Khankeh, Akbar Biglarian,
Volume 79, Issue 7 (10-2021)
Volume 79, Issue 7 (10-2021)
Abstract
Background: The preparedness and safety of hospitals in disasters are essential to maintain the health and survival of the community. Numerous studies have shown that the level of preparedness of Iranian hospitals is moderate and low. Lack of comprehensive hospital standards for disaster preparedness is one of the reasons. This study aimed to develop hospital accreditation standards for hospital disaster risk management.
Methods: This comparative study was conducted between April and September 2016. Hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards were extracted from the hospital accreditation standards of 11 countries including the United States, Canada, Australia, Malaysia, India, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Denmark and Iran. Overall, 27 hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards were introduced. The opinions of 22 disaster risk management experts were used to assess the content validity of the proposed disaster risk management accreditation standards.
Results: Differences were observed in the quality and quantity of those countries’ disaster risk management standards. The national accreditation standards of the United States, Australia, and Canada had comprehensive standards and covered all aspects of the disaster risk management cycle. Finally, 27 standards were proposed for developing Iranian hospitals’ disaster risk management accreditation standards. The CVI & CVR validity of the proposed standards were acceptable.
There were significant differences in the quantity and quality of hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards in selected countries. The most comprehensive standards belonged to the US National Standards (12 standards and 113 sub-standards), followed by the Australian and Canadian accreditation standards. The accreditation standards of the developing countries and Iran were not comprehensive and did not meet the international goals of disaster risk management. The proposed hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards had high content validity.
Conclusion: Disaster risk management accreditation standards in Iran and developing countries need to be revised and upgraded. Comprehensive standards based on international experiences and expert opinions were introduced in this study that can be used to develop hospital accreditation standards in Iran and other countries.
Methods: This comparative study was conducted between April and September 2016. Hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards were extracted from the hospital accreditation standards of 11 countries including the United States, Canada, Australia, Malaysia, India, Thailand, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Denmark and Iran. Overall, 27 hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards were introduced. The opinions of 22 disaster risk management experts were used to assess the content validity of the proposed disaster risk management accreditation standards.
Results: Differences were observed in the quality and quantity of those countries’ disaster risk management standards. The national accreditation standards of the United States, Australia, and Canada had comprehensive standards and covered all aspects of the disaster risk management cycle. Finally, 27 standards were proposed for developing Iranian hospitals’ disaster risk management accreditation standards. The CVI & CVR validity of the proposed standards were acceptable.
There were significant differences in the quantity and quality of hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards in selected countries. The most comprehensive standards belonged to the US National Standards (12 standards and 113 sub-standards), followed by the Australian and Canadian accreditation standards. The accreditation standards of the developing countries and Iran were not comprehensive and did not meet the international goals of disaster risk management. The proposed hospital disaster risk management accreditation standards had high content validity.
Conclusion: Disaster risk management accreditation standards in Iran and developing countries need to be revised and upgraded. Comprehensive standards based on international experiences and expert opinions were introduced in this study that can be used to develop hospital accreditation standards in Iran and other countries.
| Page 1 from 1 |
Related Websites
Site Keywords
Cardiology, Anatomy, Biology, Epidemiology, Immunology, Neuroscience, Physical therapy, Physiology, Dermatology, Endocrinology and metabolicSite Statistics
- Registered users: 8144 users
- Online users: 2 users
- Guest users: 782 users
- All visits: 35956096 visits
- Visits in 24 Hours: 34423 visits
- Total articles: 11944 articles
- Published articles: 5077 articles
© 2026 , Tehran University of Medical Sciences, CC BY-NC 4.0
Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb