Martin Beaumont1, Madeleine E Drew, Andre-Pierre Contandriopoulos. 1. Conseil canadien d'agrément des services de santé, Développement des marchés nationaux et internationaux, candidat au doctorat en santé publique, Faculté de médecine, Université de Montréal. martin.beaumont@cchsa-ccass.ca
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this pan-Canadian study was to evaluate the feasibility of developing a set of accreditation standards supported by an accreditation process for public health in Canada. METHODS: Twenty-four telephone interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed and analyzed. RESULTS: The scope of public health implied in respondents' answers included health protection, health promotion, disease prevention and surveillance. A large majority of the experts were in favour of implementing accreditation in public health. Of these, close to two thirds answered that public health needed its own standards to address some of the current gaps. People in health systems were faster to question the relevance of separate standards for public health to avoid creating artificial barriers within the continuum of care. Respondents who opposed an accreditation process for public health cited the lack of capacity currently in the system. Yet, proponents argued that accreditation could actually be used as a capacity-building tool and assist "to fight the tyranny of the urgent". Some identified the actual process of developing accreditation standards for public health as being a valuable exercise. CONCLUSION: It appears that public health in Canada would benefit from an accreditation process developed in consultation with the field, to enhance visibility, capacity building, and performance through pan-Canadian standards which would also have to be flexible enough to accommodate specific provincial and local contexts.
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this pan-Canadian study was to evaluate the feasibility of developing a set of accreditation standards supported by an accreditation process for public health in Canada. METHODS: Twenty-four telephone interviews were conducted, recorded, transcribed and analyzed. RESULTS: The scope of public health implied in respondents' answers included health protection, health promotion, disease prevention and surveillance. A large majority of the experts were in favour of implementing accreditation in public health. Of these, close to two thirds answered that public health needed its own standards to address some of the current gaps. People in health systems were faster to question the relevance of separate standards for public health to avoid creating artificial barriers within the continuum of care. Respondents who opposed an accreditation process for public health cited the lack of capacity currently in the system. Yet, proponents argued that accreditation could actually be used as a capacity-building tool and assist "to fight the tyranny of the urgent". Some identified the actual process of developing accreditation standards for public health as being a valuable exercise. CONCLUSION: It appears that public health in Canada would benefit from an accreditation process developed in consultation with the field, to enhance visibility, capacity building, and performance through pan-Canadian standards which would also have to be flexible enough to accommodate specific provincial and local contexts.