David Greenfield1, Marjorie Pawsey, Jeffrey Braithwaite. 1. Centre for Clinical Governance Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia. d.greenfield@unsw.edu.au
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Motivated staff are needed to improve quality and safety in healthcare organizations. Stimulating and engaging staff to participate in accreditation processes is a considerable challenge. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of health executives, managers and frontline clinicians who participated in organizational accreditation processes: what motivated them to engage, and what benefits accrued? DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: The setting was a large public teaching hospital undergoing a planned review of its accreditation status. A research protocol was employed to conduct semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 30 staff with varied organizational roles, from different professions, to discuss their involvement in accreditation. Thematic analysis of the data was undertaken. RESULTS: The analysis identified three categories, each with sub-themes: accreditation response (reactions to accreditation and the value of surveys); survey issues (participation in the survey, learning through interactions and constraints) and documentation issues (self-assessment report, survey report and recommendations). Participants' occupational role focuses their attention to prioritize aspects of the accreditation process. Their motivations to participate and the benefits that accrue to them can be positively self-reinforcing. Participants have a desire to engage collaboratively with colleagues to learn and validate their efforts to improve. CONCLUSION: Participation in the accreditation process promoted a quality and safety culture that crossed organizational boundaries. The insights into worker motivation can be applied to engage staff to promote learning, overcome organizational boundaries and improve services. The findings can be applied to enhance involvement with accreditation and, more broadly, to other quality and safety activities.
OBJECTIVE: Motivated staff are needed to improve quality and safety in healthcare organizations. Stimulating and engaging staff to participate in accreditation processes is a considerable challenge. The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of health executives, managers and frontline clinicians who participated in organizational accreditation processes: what motivated them to engage, and what benefits accrued? DESIGN/PARTICIPANTS: The setting was a large public teaching hospital undergoing a planned review of its accreditation status. A research protocol was employed to conduct semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 30 staff with varied organizational roles, from different professions, to discuss their involvement in accreditation. Thematic analysis of the data was undertaken. RESULTS: The analysis identified three categories, each with sub-themes: accreditation response (reactions to accreditation and the value of surveys); survey issues (participation in the survey, learning through interactions and constraints) and documentation issues (self-assessment report, survey report and recommendations). Participants' occupational role focuses their attention to prioritize aspects of the accreditation process. Their motivations to participate and the benefits that accrue to them can be positively self-reinforcing. Participants have a desire to engage collaboratively with colleagues to learn and validate their efforts to improve. CONCLUSION: Participation in the accreditation process promoted a quality and safety culture that crossed organizational boundaries. The insights into worker motivation can be applied to engage staff to promote learning, overcome organizational boundaries and improve services. The findings can be applied to enhance involvement with accreditation and, more broadly, to other quality and safety activities.
Authors: M-J Jiménez; C Ferra; O García; F de Arriba; S Jiménez; A Insunza; M Calabuig; A Mantecon; J Sánchez; M Torres; P Balsalobre; J Linio; A Jiménez; E Feliu; J-M Ribera Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2014-04-28 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: David Greenfield; Reece Hinchcliff; Max Moldovan; Virginia Mumford; Marjorie Pawsey; Johanna Irene Westbrook; Jeffrey Braithwaite Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Virginia Mumford; David Greenfield; Anne Hogden; Kevin Forde; Johanna Westbrook; Jeffrey Braithwaite Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Reece Hinchcliff; David Greenfield; Johanna I Westbrook; Marjorie Pawsey; Virginia Mumford; Jeffrey Braithwaite Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-10-24 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: David Greenfield; Mike Civil; Andrew Donnison; Anne Hogden; Reece Hinchcliff; Johanna Westbrook; Jeffrey Braithwaite Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2014-11-21 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Arna L van Doorn-Klomberg; Jozé C C Braspenning; René J Wolters; Margriet Bouma; Michel Wensing Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2014-11-04 Impact factor: 2.497
Authors: Ehsan Teymourzadeh; Mozhdeh Ramezani; Mohammad Arab; Abbas Rahimi Foroushani; Ali Akbari Sari Journal: Iran Red Crescent Med J Date: 2016-01-11 Impact factor: 0.611
Authors: Taraneh Yousefinezhadi; Ali Mohammad Mosadeghrad; Mohammad Arab; Mozhdeh Ramezani; Ali Akbari Sari Journal: Iran J Public Health Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 1.429
Authors: Reece Hinchcliff; David Greenfield; Max Moldovan; Marjorie Pawsey; Virginia Mumford; Johanna Irene Westbrook; Jeffrey Braithwaite Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2012-08-04 Impact factor: 2.692