Literature DB >> 22071861

Effectiveness of external inspection of compliance with standards in improving healthcare organisation behaviour, healthcare professional behaviour or patient outcomes.

Gerd Flodgren1, Marie-Pascale Pomey, Sarah A Taber, Martin P Eccles.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Inspection systems are used in health care to promote quality improvements, i.e. to achieve changes in organisational structures or processes, healthcare provider behaviour and patient outcomes. These systems are based on the assumption that externally promoted adherence to evidence-based standards (through inspection/assessment) will result in higher quality of health care. However, the benefits of external inspection in terms of organisational, provider and patient level outcomes are not clear.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of external inspection of compliance with standards in improving healthcare organisation behaviour, healthcare professional behaviour and patient outcomes. SEARCH
METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases for studies: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, Scopus, HMIC, Index to Theses and Intute from their inception dates up to May 2011. There was no language restriction and studies were included regardless of publication status. We searched the reference lists of included studies and contacted authors of relevant papers, accreditation bodies and the International Organization for Standardisation (ISO), regarding any further published or unpublished work. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), interrupted time-series (ITSs) and controlled before and after studies (CBAs) evaluating the effect of external inspection against external standards on healthcare organisation change, healthcare professional behaviour or patient outcomes in hospitals, primary healthcare organisations and other community-based healthcare organisations. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied eligibility criteria, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of each included study. Since meta-analysis was not possible, we produced a narrative results summary. MAIN
RESULTS: We identified one cluster-RCT involving 20 South African public hospitals (Salmon 2003) and one ITS involving all acute trusts in England (OPM 2009) for inclusion in this review.Salmon and colleagues (Salmon 2003) showed mixed effects of a hospital accreditation system on the compliance with COHSASA (the Council for Health Services Accreditation for South Africa) accreditation standards and eight indicators of hospital quality. Significantly improved total mean compliance score with COHSASA accreditation standards was found for 21/28 service elements: mean intervention effect (95% confidence interval (CI)) was 30% (23% to 57%) (P < 0.001). The score increased from 48% to 78% in intervention hospitals, while remaining the same in control hospitals (43%). A sub-analysis of 424 a priori identified critical criteria (19 service elements) showed significantly improved compliance with the critical standards (P < 0.001). The score increased from 41% (21% to 46%) to 75% (55% to 96%) in intervention hospitals, but was unchanged in control hospitals (37%). Only one of the nine intervention hospitals gained full accreditation status at the end of the study period, with two others reached pre-accreditation status.The median intervention effect (range) for the indicators of hospital quality of care was 2.4 (-1.9 to +11.8) and only one of the eight indicators: 'nurses perception of clinical quality, participation and teamwork' was significantly improved (mean intervention effect 5.7, P = 0.03).Re-analysis of the MRSA (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus) data showed statistically non-significant effects of the Healthcare Commissions Infection Inspection programme. AUTHORS'
CONCLUSIONS: We only identified two studies for inclusion in this review, which highlights the paucity of high-quality controlled evaluations of the effectiveness of external inspection systems. No firm conclusions could therefore be drawn about the effectiveness of external inspection on compliance with standards.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22071861      PMCID: PMC4164461          DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008992.pub2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  13 in total

1.  The external assessment of health services.

Authors:  Charles Shaw
Journal:  World Hosp Health Serv       Date:  2004

Review 2.  Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes.

Authors:  G Jamtvedt; J M Young; D T Kristoffersen; M A O'Brien; A D Oxman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2006-04-19

3.  Monitoring compliance with JCAHO standards using a medication-control review tool.

Authors:  Joanne G Kowiatek; Robert J Weber; Dennis E Schilling; Teresa P McKaveney
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  2002-09-15       Impact factor: 2.637

4.  The impact of the joint commission for accreditation of healthcare organizations pain initiative on perioperative opiate consumption and recovery room length of stay.

Authors:  Peter E Frasco; Juraj Sprung; Terrence L Trentman
Journal:  Anesth Analg       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 5.108

5.  Four years of accreditation council of graduate medical education duty hour regulations: have they made a difference?

Authors:  David C Shonka; Tamer A Ghanem; Matthew A Hubbard; Daniel A Barker; Bradley W Kesser
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.325

Review 6.  Publication bias in clinical trials due to statistical significance or direction of trial results.

Authors:  Sally Hopewell; Kirsty Loudon; Mike J Clarke; Andrew D Oxman; Kay Dickersin
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2009-01-21

7.  Reduction of in-hospital mortality among California hospitals meeting Leapfrog evidence-based standards for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Authors:  Benjamin S Brooke; Bruce A Perler; Francesca Dominici; Martin A Makary; Peter J Pronovost
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 4.268

Review 8.  Measuring against clinical standards.

Authors:  Charles D Shaw
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2003-07-15       Impact factor: 3.786

9.  A controlled evaluation of a JCAH regulation.

Authors:  J A Mattes
Journal:  Psychiatr Hosp       Date:  1987

10.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  37 in total

1.  Practice accreditation: the European perspective.

Authors:  Helen E Lester; Tina Eriksson; Rob Dijkstra; Katrin Martinson; Tomasz Tomasik; Nigel Sparrow
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 5.386

Review 2.  External inspection of compliance with standards for improved healthcare outcomes.

Authors:  Gerd Flodgren; Daniela C Gonçalves-Bradley; Marie-Pascale Pomey
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-12-02

Review 3.  Governance arrangements for health systems in low-income countries: an overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Cristian A Herrera; Simon Lewin; Elizabeth Paulsen; Agustín Ciapponi; Newton Opiyo; Tomas Pantoja; Gabriel Rada; Charles S Wiysonge; Gabriel Bastías; Sebastian Garcia Marti; Charles I Okwundu; Blanca Peñaloza; Andrew D Oxman
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-09-12

4.  Prioritizing guideline recommendations for implementation: a systematic, consumer-inclusive process with a case study using the Australian Clinical Guidelines for Stroke Management.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Lynch; Chris Lassig; Tari Turner; Leonid Churilov; Kelvin Hill; Kirstine Shrubsole
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2021-05-22

Review 5.  A systematic review of hospital accreditation: the challenges of measuring complex intervention effects.

Authors:  Kirsten Brubakk; Gunn E Vist; Geir Bukholm; Paul Barach; Ole Tjomsland
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  A retrospective review of how nonconformities are expressed and finalized in external inspections of health-care facilities.

Authors:  Einar Hovlid; Helge Høifødt; Bente Smedbråten; Geir Sverre Braut
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-09-23       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Commentary: Improving the Sustainability of Healthcare in Canada through Physician-Engaged Delivery System Reforms.

Authors:  Amity E Quinn; Braden J Manns
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2021-02

8.  Strengthening integrated primary health care in Sofala, Mozambique.

Authors:  Kenneth Sherr; Fatima Cuembelo; Cathy Michel; Sarah Gimbel; Mark Micek; Marina Kariaganis; Alusio Pio; João Luis Manuel; James Pfeiffer; Stephen Gloyd
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Economic evaluation of Australian acute care accreditation (ACCREDIT-CBA (Acute)): study protocol for a mixed-method research project.

Authors:  Virginia Mumford; David Greenfield; Reece Hinchcliff; Max Moldovan; Kevin Forde; Johanna I Westbrook; Jeffrey Braithwaite
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-02-08       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 10.  Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers: an overview of systematic reviews.

Authors:  Rebecca Ryan; Nancy Santesso; Dianne Lowe; Sophie Hill; Jeremy Grimshaw; Megan Prictor; Caroline Kaufman; Genevieve Cowie; Michael Taylor
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2014-04-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.