This week’s topic: Healthcare Policies and Accreditation Read and discuss the following three articles: ACAs Performance Based Healthcare Standards ACAsPerformanceBasedHealthCareStandards.pdf Road to Accreditation RoadToAccreditation.pdf JCAHO Accreditation and Quality of Care for Acute Myocardial Infarction JCAHO accreditation and quality of care for acute myocardial infarction.pdf Have an open discussion about these articles. Share your thoughts and relate them to what you have learned by reading case readings and analysis we have done already. Are there less errors in hospitals that are accredited? What is the value of accreditation? Do quality concerns initiate changes in staff behavior? Should accreditation be based on results? You must use a citation and reference in your initial post and in at least one of your response posts, using proper APA 6th edition format.
What is (or will be) the link between an accreditation process and an LHD’s work in quality improvement? That is the question being explored next. One stated purpose of the NC accreditation system is that it will help an agency identify areas for future QI work. The Site Visit and its report point out various areas for improvement in the department. Fifty percent of accredited agencies report engaging in activities to address suggestions for quality improvement identified by site visitors.Much depends on the attitude or culture of the agency toward quality improvement. One difficulty in gaining acceptance by some health directors has been the perception that the accreditation process does not lead to QI. Some directors have not approached the process with an improvement mindset. Some see the process as one of completing a task and that they are done after the Site Visit and receipt of the report. Accreditation becomes a “to do” that is completed and checked off. Others want to “get all the standards met,” instead of looking at how the process will benefit or improve the agency. They may focus on finding or creating as much documentary evidence as possible to show that the agency is able to meet all standards. But a survey of accredited agencies shows that the majority of accredited agencies are conducting QI and 14 agencies have conducted 3 or more QI projects. These QI activities are focused on improving clinic efficiencies, customer satisfaction, and program operations. Previous surveys of these agencies indicated that what the agencies had been reporting as QI activities were actually quality-assurance activities.
Differing opinions still exist among health directors on the role of accreditation in NC. A fundamental difference exists that still must be resolved. Some think that accreditation is not a path to improvement for all agencies, but should point out local health departments that should not be stand alone agencies. For others the overall goal of accreditation would be improvement in health departments to provide a platform to improve the health status and outcomes of our communities.