Virginia Mumford

Narrative synthesis of health service accreditation literature

Aims To systematically identify and synthesise health service accreditation literature. Methods A systematic identification and narrative synthesis of health service accreditation literature published prior to 2012 were conducted. The search identified 122 empirical studies that examined either the processes or impacts of accreditation programmes. Study components were recorded, including: dates of publication; research settings; levels of study evidence and quality using established rating frameworks; and key results. A content analysis was conducted to determine the frequency of key themes and subthemes examined in the literature and identify knowledge-gaps requiring research attention. Results The majority of studies (n=67) were published since 2006, occurred in the USA (n=60) and focused on acute care (n=79). Two thematic categories, that is, ‘organisational impacts’ and ‘relationship to quality measures’, were addressed 60 or more times in the literature. ‘Financial impacts’, ‘consumer or patient satisfaction’ and ‘survey and surveyor issues’ were each examined fewer than 15 times. The literature is limited in terms of the level of evidence and quality of studies, but highlights potential relationships among accreditation programmes, high quality organisational processes and safe clinical care. Conclusions Due to the limitations of the literature, it is not prudent to make strong claims about the effectiveness of health service accreditation. Nonetheless, several critical issues and knowledge-gaps were identified that may help stimulate and inform discussion among healthcare stakeholders. Ongoing effort is required to build upon the accreditation evidence-base by using high quality experimental study designs to examine the processes, effectiveness and financial value of accreditation programmes and their critical components in different healthcare domains.

Stakeholder perspectives on implementing accreditation programs: a qualitative study of enabling factors

BackgroundAccreditation programs are complex, system-wide quality and safety interventions. Despite their international popularity, evidence of their effectiveness is weak and contradictory. This may be due to variable implementation in different contexts. However, there is limited research that informs implementation strategies. We aimed to advance knowledge in this area by identifying factors that enable effective implementation of accreditation programs across different healthcare settings.MethodsWe conducted 39 focus groups and eight interviews between 2011 and 2012, involving 258 diverse healthcare stakeholders from every Australian State and Territory. Interviews were semi-structured and focused on the aims, implementation and consequences of three prominent accreditation programs in the aged, primary and acute care sectors. Data were thematically analysed to distil and categorise facilitators of effective implementation.ResultsFour factors were identified as critical enablers of effective implementation: the accreditation program is collaborative, valid and uses relevant standards; accreditation is favourably received by health professionals; healthcare organisations are capable of embracing accreditation; and accreditation is appropriately aligned with other regulatory initiatives and supported by relevant incentives.ConclusionsStrategic implementation of accreditation programs should target the four factors emerging from this study, which may increase the likelihood of accreditation being implemented successfully.

A multimethod research investigation of consumer involvement in Australian health service accreditation programmes: the ACCREDIT-SCI study protocol

Introduction Health service accreditation programmes are a regulatory mechanism adopted to drive improvements inpatient safety and quality. Research investigating the benefits or limitations, of consumer involvement in accreditation programmes is negligible. To develop our knowledge in this area the ACCREDIT collaboration (Accreditation Collaborative for the Conduct of Research, Evaluation and Designated Investigations through Teamwork) has developed a research plan, known as the ACCREDIT-SCI (Standards of Consumer Involvement) study protocol. Two complementary studies have been designed: one, to examine the effectiveness of a standard for consumer participation and two, to explore how patient experiences vary across a range of settings with differing accreditation results. Methods and design The research setting is the Australian healthcare system, and the two studies focus on three accreditation programmes in the primary, acute and aged care domains. The studies will use multimethods: document analysis; interviews and surveys. Participants will be stakeholders across the three domains including: policy officers; frontline healthcare professionals; accreditation agency personnel, including surveyors and healthcare consumers. Drawing on previous experience, the research team has developed purpose-designed tools. Data will be analysed using thematic, narrative and statistical (descriptive and inferential) procedures. Ethics and dissemination The University of New South Wales Human Research Ethics Committee has approved the two studies (HREC 10274). Findings will be disseminated through seminars, conference presentations, academic publications and research partner websites. The findings will be formulated to facilitate uptake by policy and accreditation agency professionals, researchers and academics, and consumers, nationally and internationally.

Disentangling quality and safety indicator data: A longitudinal, comparative study of hand hygiene compliance and accreditation outcomes in 96 Australian hospitals

Objectives The study aims are twofold. First, to investigate the suitability of hand hygiene as an indicator of accreditation outcomes and, second, to test the hypothesis that hospitals with better accreditation outcomes achieve higher hand hygiene compliance rates. Design A retrospective, longitudinal, multisite comparative survey. Setting Acute public hospitals in New South Wales, Australia. Participants 96 acute hospitals with accreditation survey results from two surveys during 2009–2012 and submitted data for more than four hand hygiene audits between 2010 and 2013. Outcomes Our primary outcome comprised observational hand hygiene compliance data from eight audits during 2010–2013. The explanatory variables in our multilevel regression model included: accreditation outcomes and scores for the infection control standard; timing of the surveys; and hospital size and activity. Results Average hand hygiene compliance rates increased from 67.7% to 80.3% during the study period (2010–2013), with 46.7% of hospitals achieving target compliance rates of 70% in audit 1, versus 92.3% in audit 8. Average hand hygiene rates at small hospitals were 7.8 percentage points (pp) higher than those at the largest hospitals (p<0.05). The association between hand hygiene rates, accreditation outcomes and infection control scores is less clear. Conclusions Our results indicate that accreditation outcomes and hand hygiene audit data are measuring different parts of the quality and safety spectrum. Understanding what is being measured when selecting indicators to assess the impact of accreditation is critical as focusing on accreditation results would discount successful hand hygiene implementation by smaller hospitals. Conversely, relying on hand hygiene results would discount the infection control related research and leadership investment by larger hospitals. Our hypothesis appears to be confounded by an accreditation programme that makes it more difficult for smaller hospitals to achieve high infection control scores.

Analysing 'big picture' policy reform mechanisms : the Australian health service safety and quality accreditation scheme

Agencies promoting national health‐care accreditation reform to improve the quality of care and safety of patients are largely working without specific blueprints that can increase the likelihood of success.

Stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of an electronic medication management system to reduce medication errors, adverse drug events and average length of stay at two paediatric hospitals: a study protocol.

Introduction Medication errors are the most frequent cause of preventable harm in hospitals. Medication management in paediatric patients is particularly complex and consequently potential for harms are greater than in adults. Electronic medication management (eMM) systems are heralded as a highly effective intervention to reduce adverse drug events (ADEs), yet internationally evidence of their effectiveness in paediatric populations is limited. This study will assess the effectiveness of an eMM system to reduce medication errors, ADEs and length of stay (LOS). The study will also investigate system impact on clinical work processes. Methods and analysis A stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial (SWCRCT) will measure changes pre-eMM and post-eMM system implementation in prescribing and medication administration error (MAE) rates, potential and actual ADEs, and average LOS. In stage 1, 8 wards within the first paediatric hospital will be randomised to receive the eMM system 1 week apart. In stage 2, the second paediatric hospital will randomise implementation of a modified eMM and outcomes will be assessed. Prescribing errors will be identified through record reviews, and MAEs through direct observation of nurses and record reviews. Actual and potential severity will be assigned. Outcomes will be assessed at the patient-level using mixed models, taking into account correlation of admissions within wards and multiple admissions for the same patient, with adjustment for potential confounders. Interviews and direct observation of clinicians will investigate the effects of the system on workflow. Data from site 1 will be used to develop improvements in the eMM and implemented at site 2, where the SWCRCT design will be repeated (stage 2). Ethics and dissemination The research has been approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the Sydney Childrens Hospitals Network and Macquarie University. Results will be reported through academic journals and seminar and conference presentations. Trial registration number Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) 370325.

Is accreditation linked to hospital infection rates? A 4-year, data linkage study of Staphylococcus aureus rates and accreditation scores in 77 Australian acute hospitals

OBJECTIVES To test our hypothesis that hospitals with higher accreditation scores, specifically in infection control, would be associated with lower Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (SAB) rates. DESIGN A retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS Acute public hospitals (n = 77) in New South Wales, Australia, with reported SAB rates, results from two accreditation surveys and results from at least four hand hygiene audits. METHODS We linked three separate data sets comprising SAB rates, accreditation scores and hand hygiene rates. SAB rates were regressed against accreditation scores, hand hygiene audit rates and hospital demographics using a generalized linear model to account for the non-linear nature of our outcome variable. RESULTS Significant (P < 0.05) findings included the following: SAB rates across all hospitals fell from 1.34 per 10 000 bed days in 2009 to 0.77 per 10 000 bed days in 2012; mean SAB rates in small hospitals (0.62/10 000 bed days) over the study period were lower than those for principal referral hospitals (1.52/10 000 bed days); smaller hospitals with higher accreditation scores had lower SAB rates, but larger hospitals with higher overall accreditation scores had higher SAB rates, although the effect size was small (<2%). CONCLUSIONS There is a strong evidence base for using SAB rates to measure the impact of infection control programs that are assessed during accreditation. However, there is less evidence to support whether accreditation scores accurately reflect implementation of the infection control accreditation standards. This impacts identification of indicators to measure patient safety and quality of care, especially in ensuring these are appropriate across a range of hospital size and activities.

Management of delirium: a clinical governance approach

This study assessed the management of delirium in the Acute Care of the Elderly unit (ACE) at a tertiary referral hospital as a case study of the application of clinical governance principles. The environment was found to be supportive of ongoing clinical governance activities, both in clinical organisation of work processes and orientation of management. However, patient involvement, dissemination and use of clinical pathways, performance measurement and feedback, and maintaining stability of care are areas requiring further development. Although there is a clinical governance strategy in place at the policy level, this has not always filtered through to the level of clinical work.

Counting the costs of accreditation in acute care: An activity-based costing approach

Objectives To assess the costs of hospital accreditation in Australia. Design Mixed methods design incorporating: stakeholder analysis; survey design and implementation; activity-based costs analysis; and expert panel review. Setting Acute care hospitals accredited by the Australian Council for Health Care Standards. Participants Six acute public hospitals across four States. Results Accreditation costs varied from 0.03% to 0.60% of total hospital operating costs per year, averaged across the 4-year accreditation cycle. Relatively higher costs were associated with the surveys years and with smaller facilities. At a national level these costs translate to

Better evidence for earlier assessment and surgical intervention for refractory epilepsy (The BEST study): a mixed methods study protocol

A36.83 million, equivalent to 0.1% of acute public hospital recurrent expenditure in the 2012 fiscal year. Conclusions This is the first time accreditation costs have been independently evaluated across a wide range of hospitals and highlights the additional cost burden for smaller facilities. A better understanding of the costs allows policymakers to assess alternative accreditation and other quality improvement strategies, and understand their impact across a range of facilities. This methodology can be adapted to assess international accreditation programmes.