Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “ACCREDITATION”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1998

Accreditation across borders: the introduction of Joint Commission accreditation in Spain.

BACKGROUND: Introducing accreditation as conducted by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (Oakbrook Terrace, III) into Spain has raised many issues regarding the internationalization of accreditation. CHARACTERISTICS OF ACCREDITATION: In recent years more and more countries have considered accreditation a useful tool for the improvement of health care quality. In spite of the differences in the health care systems of the countries where accreditation has been introduced, many of the original characteristics of accreditation as seen in the United States largely remain: peer review evaluation, support of professional associations, voluntary participation, and a national approach. These similarities reflect the fact that the majority of the programs are based on models created by the Joint Commission. THE EXPERIENCE OF THE AVEDIS DONABEDIAN FOUNDATION: In 1994 the Avedis Donabedian Foundation (FAD), a nonprofit organization founded in Barcelona in 1988, broadened its scope to include accreditation. Having rejected the idea of creating de novo its own standards and accreditation program, FAD worked out an agreement with the Joint Commission whereby FAD would become a Spanish accrediting body to accredit Spanish hospitals but would collaborate with Joint Commission International to adopt the Joint Commission's accreditation standards and processes. DISCUSSION: The development of accreditation continues. As of spring 1998, seven hospitals and two ambulatory care centers are preparing for accreditation. FAD's experience with adapting the Joint Commission model of accreditation should be instructive to other countries considering health care accreditation.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2005

Relationship between accreditation scores and the public disclosure of accreditation reports: a cross sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association between accreditation scores and the disclosure of accreditation reports. DESIGN: A cross sectional study. SETTING: Hospitals participating in an accreditation programme in Japan. PARTICIPANTS: 547 of the 817 hospitals accredited by the Japan Council for Quality Health Care (JCQHC) by January 2003. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on participation in public disclosure of accreditation reports through the JCQHC website were obtained from the JCQHC database. Comments on the disclosure were obtained using a questionnaire based survey. RESULTS: A total of 508 (93%) of the participating hospitals disclosed their accreditation reports on the JCQHC website. Public hospitals were significantly more committed to public disclosure than private hospitals, and larger hospitals were significantly more likely to participate in public disclosure than smaller hospitals. Accreditation scores were positively related to the public disclosure of hospital accreditation reports. Scores for patient focused care and efforts to meet community needs were significantly higher in actively disclosing hospitals than in non-disclosing hospitals. Among the large hospitals, scores for safety management were significantly higher in hospitals advocating disclosure than in non-disclosing hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: There was a positive correlation between accreditation scores and public disclosure. Our results suggest that the public disclosure of accreditation reports should be encouraged to improve public accountability and the quality of care. Future studies should investigate the interaction between public disclosure, processes and outcomes.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2003

Voluntary accreditation of cellular therapies: Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy (FACT).

Voluntary accreditation of cells, tissues, and cellular and tissue-based products intended for human transplantation is an important mechanism for improving quality in cellular therapy. The Foundation for the Accreditation of Cellular Therapy (FACT) has developed and implemented programs of voluntary inspection and accreditation for hematopoietic cellular therapy, and for cord blood banking. These programs are based on the standards of the clinical and laboratory professionals of the American Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), the International Society for Cellular Therapy (ISCT), and NETCORD. FACT has collaborated with European colleagues in the development of the Joint Accreditation Committee in Europe (jACIE). FACT has published standards documents, a guidance manual, accreditation checklists, and inspection documents; and has trained as inspectors over 300 professionals active in the field. All inspectors have a minimum of 5 years' experience in the area they inspect. Since the incorporation of FACT in 1996, 215 hematopoietic progenitor cell facilities have applied for FACT accreditation. Of these facilities, 113 are fully accredited; the others are in the process of document submission or inspection. Significant opportunities and challenges exist for FACT in the future, including keeping standards and guidance materials current and relevant, recruiting and retaining expert inspectors, and establishing collaborations to develop standards and accreditation systems for new cellular products. The continuing dialogue with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is also important to ensure that they are aware of the accomplishments of voluntary accreditation, and keep FACT membership alerted to FDA intentions for the future. Other potential avenues of communication and cooperation with FDA and other regulatory agencies are being investigated and evaluated.

Accreditation↗
PubMedDate not supplied

[The integrated approach between Health Organisation accreditation and professional excellence accreditation].

Later than in other industrialized areas, Health Organisation accreditation has become popular in our country during the last few years as a result of legislation requiring accreditation for healthcare providers of the National Health Service. Out of the two accreditation models, for regulation and public accountability (institutional) and professional, voluntary self-developed (for excellence), Institutional accreditation process has been slowly growing with the adoption of generic structural and organisational standards, which have been set up and managed directly by government. The recently undertaken second model is a peer review assessment activity that originates from a comparison with explicit standards during reciprocal visits carried out by professional organisations. The basis for the assessment is primarily clinical and patient oriented. The healthcare quality of Institutional accreditation is guaranteed mainly through the achievement of predetermined standards for risk management and organisation. On the other hand, the excellence accreditation, whose aim is to implement the continuous improvement of quality, depends on the context and the changes that result from new knowledge and scientific progress. The model operates according to values, which can change in the long run. It measures the effort to improve performances while special care is required to define standards through peer consensus. Once the prescribed model of accreditation is adopted, as is the case for Health Organisation accreditation, it is essential to have flexible patient-oriented tools ensuring that new knowledge and scientific progress complete the assessment and audit.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2000

Is clinical pathology accreditation worth it? A survey of CPA-accredited laboratories.

Following two pilot studies, Clinical Pathology Accreditation (CPA) accreditation was introduced to UK pathology laboratories in 1992. Since then, significant numbers of laboratories have undergone accreditation but many have never applied. We carried out a postal survey of 145 accredited laboratories in the UK to independently determine the opinions of laboratory managers/clinicians about CPA and whether accreditation had produced any significant benefits to pathology services. Ninety-three replies were received (64 per cent) a good response to an unsolicited questionnaire. Most laboratories felt accreditation by CPA had resulted in better laboratory performance with more documentation and better health and safety and training procedures. CPA accreditation was believed to provide useful information by approximately 50 per cent of laboratories but was also felt by a significant proportion of laboratories to be over-bureaucratic, inefficient and expensive (46 of 93 respondents). Many complaints were voiced about the excessive paperwork that CPA generated and there was also a significant body of opinion that felt that CPA assessed areas were the domain of other regulatory bodies such as the CPSM, IBMS and HSE.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2004

Toward a unified system of accreditation for professional preparation in health education: final report of the National Task Force on Accreditation in Health Education.

During the past 40 years, health education has taken significant steps toward improving quality assurance in professional preparation through individual certification and program approval and accreditation. Although the profession has begun to embrace individual certification, program accreditation in health education has been neither uniformly available nor universally accepted by institutions of higher education. To further strengthen professional preparation in health education, the Society for Public Health Education (SOPHE) and the American Association for Health Education (AAHE) established the National Task Force on Accreditation in Health Education in 2001. The 3-year Task Force was charged with developing a detailed plan for a coordinated accreditation system for undergraduate and graduate programs in health education. This article summarizes the Task Force's findings and recommendations, which have been approved by the SOPHE and AAHE boards, and, if implemented, promise to lay the foundation for the highest quality professional preparation and practice in health education.

Accreditation↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Recommendations for evaluating accreditation guideline outcomes assessment methods for accredited environmental health programs in the United States.

This paper was written to provide guidance to the National Environmental Health Science and Protection Accreditation Council (EHAC) on obtaining recognition either from the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) or from the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), with respect to outcomes assessment. The authors provide suggestions for expansion of existing EHAC accreditation criteria, including those related to outcomes assessment. Comparisons are made between EHAC and two other accrediting agencies currently recognized by USDE. The authors provide a detailed list of recommendations and a copy of EHAC's current outcomes assessment tool.

Environmental Health↗
PubMed2000

[Genuine medical accreditation systems in the USA according to standards of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO)--reflections on the transferability of the procedures to Germany].

In a number of anglophone countries in parallel to the industrial trend accreditation systems have been developed for health care organizations and specially for hospitals. These systems were introduced and instituted as a part of the health care system in the countries. Central elements and central procedures of these genuine-medical accreditation systems for hospitals in the United States, in Australia, Canada, France and in Great Britain are mostly identical. They focus primarily on the patient and his way from access to post discharge in a hospital. Core of the systems is a catalogue with standards, which in a systematic and comprehensive way gives ideas of good professional performance in hospitals. The catalogues can be used internally to develop and improve quality and quality management in a hospital. Primarily, however, the accreditation systems are designed to provide most objective measures for external evaluation of quality and quality management.

Accreditation↗
PubMed2005

Radiation oncology practice accreditation: the American College of Radiation Oncology, Practice Accreditation Program, guidelines and standards.

The American College of Radiation Oncology Practice Accreditation Program (ACRO PAP) is a process by which a medical practice is evaluated through an in depth external review to ascertain whether or not key components of the practice comply with existing regulations, rules, laws, practice guidelines and professional practice standards. In radiation oncology, like other fields, it is driven by the need or desire to demonstrate an identified level of patient care. The accreditation process adopted by the American College of Radiation Oncology (ACRO) is based on the parameters of quality care assessment outlined by the National Academy of Science's Institute of Medicine. Those practices that meet these criteria are eligible for recognition and accreditation by ACRO.

Accreditation↗
PubMed1990

Royal College of Pathologists' United Kingdom pilot study of laboratory accreditation. The College Accreditation Steering Committee.

The Royal College of Pathologists recently commissioned a pilot study to assess the feasibility, desirability, and cost of establishing a national scheme for laboratory accreditation in the United Kingdom. Using a format similar to that designed by the College of American Pathologists, eight inspectors visited 24 laboratories comprising the major disciplines of two district hospitals, two teaching hospitals, a specialised (paediatric) hospital and a private hospital. Nine were considered accreditable without reservation, but 15 had deficiencies identified of differing importance which needed to be corrected before accreditation could be awarded. Problems identified were variable, but none related to technical performance and many did not require extra resources to correct. The exercise was conducted without organisational difficulty at an approximate direct cost of 300 pounds per laboratory. The study shows that the format used could form the basis of a cost effective nationwide strategy. The type of problems identified suggest that such a strategy is more likely to succeed if it is organised from within the pathology professions.

Accreditation↗
PubMed1999

Requirements for accreditation by the College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program.

The College of American Pathologists Laboratory Accreditation Program expects a participant laboratory or laboratory section to be able to demonstrate that it is in compliance with the Standards for Laboratory Accreditation. The program expects laboratories to demonstrate that they are continually taking steps to identify and correct deficient areas and improve performance, in compliance with the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 regulatory requirements, particularly those pertaining to proficiency testing performance, and participating as inspectors in the accreditation process.

Accreditation↗
PubMed1991

Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations: standards and accreditation for durable medical equipment providers.

The accreditation survey for home medical equipment suppliers, as performed by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, emphasizes the process of care delivery, which includes equipment management and patient/caregiver instruction. Companies preparing for a survey are advised to perform a self-assessment to determine areas in need of review and improvement.

Accreditation↗
PubMed1997

Accreditation requirements for ORYX: the next evolution in accreditation.

This year, the Joint Commission of Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations approved new requirements for participation in the accreditation process for hospitals and long-term care facilities. This article offers an ORYX overview--plus information on choosing a performance measurement system.

Accreditation↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Home care accreditation through Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations.

As home care has become an increasingly viable alternative to inpatient care, the need for industrywide standards has become a major concern for consumers and payors of health care. The Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations has developed standards which measure the quality of care and services provided by a home care organization. This article outlines the basic standards that a home infusion therapy service must meet in order to earn accreditation.

Accreditation↗