DOCSLIB.ORG

Board of Directors Meeting October 26, 2017 Marriott Marquis Hotel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Board of Directors Meeting October 26, 2017 Marriott Marquis Hotel Board of Directors Meeting October 26, 2017 Marriott Marquis Hotel Washington, DC Board of Directors Meeting October 26, 2017 Marriott Marquis, LeDroit Park/Shaw (Meeting Level 3) Washington, DC TIMED AGENDA Thursday, October 26, 2017 Breakfast 7:00 am Executive Session 1. Board Member and Officer Stipends for FY 2017-18 (A8) Dr. Skiendzielewski (phone) 7:00 am 2. ASA Practice Guidelines for Moderate Procedural Sedation (D3) Dr. Schneider 3. CCIIO Litigation Update Ms. Moore 4. Personnel Issues Mr. Wilkerson/Dr. Parker ************************************************************************************************** BREAK 8:00 am 1. Open Session Call to Order Dr. Rogers 8:15 am a. Announcements b. Changes to the agenda c. Status of items postponed definitely to this agenda d. Conflict of interest disclosure e. Disclosure of any issues discussed in executive session - ASA Practice Guidelines for Moderate Procedural Sedation & Analgesia - Board Member and Officer Stipends 2017-18 - CCIIO Litigation - Personnel Issues 1. Approval of any actions taken (restate motions in open session) 2. President’s Report Dr. Parker 8:20 am 3. President-Elect’s Report Dr. Kivela 8:30 am 4. Executive Director’s Report Mr. Wilkerson 8:40 am 5. Consent Agenda Dr. Rogers 8:50 am Minutes (A1) a. Board of Directors Meeting 1. June 27-29, 2017 b. Board of Directors Executive Session Meeting 1. June 28-29, 2017 c. Board of Directors Conference Call Meeting 1. September 27, 2017 d. Actions Taken by the Chair e. ABEM/ACEP Task Force on the Aging Physician Final Report (A4) f. Health Care System Surge Capacity Recognition, Preparedness, & Response (A9) g. Hospital Disaster Physician Privileging (A10) h. Writing Admission and Transition Orders (A14) i. Referred Amended Resolution 17(16) Insurance Collection of Beneficiary Deductibles (A18) j. Definition of Boarded Patient (A21a) k. South Carolina Public Policy Grant Request (A24) l. Medical Transport Advertising, Marketing, and Brokering (A25) m. Study on the Value & Cost Effectiveness of Emergency Care (A27) n. Clinical Ultrasound Accreditation Program Governance Charter (A28) Timed Agenda – October 26, 2017 Page 2 7. Secretary-Treasurer’s Report Dr. Friedman 8:50 am a. August 31, 2017 Financial Statement (A2) 8. Board Officer Candidate Declarations Dr. Kaplan 9:00 am a. Chair of the Board b. Vice President c. Secretary-Treasurer 9. Clinical Emergency Medicine Data Registry Update Dr. Augustine/Dr. Goyal 9:05 am 10. Emergency Medicine Residents’ Association Report Dr. Degesys 9:25 am 11. Society of Emergency Medicine Physician Assistants Report Mr. Morissette 9:30 am 12. American Academy of Emergency Nurse Practitioners Report Ms. Evans 9:35 am 13. American Board of Emergency Medicine Report Dr. Kowalenko 9:40 am BREAK 10:00 am 14. Emergency Nurses Association Report Ms. Wiley 10:15 am 15. American Academy of Physician Assistants Report Mr. Chambers 10:20 am 16. Pediatric Emergency Medicine Committee Dr. Perina a. Pediatric Medication Safety in the ED (A20) 10:25 am 17. Disaster Preparedness & Response Committee Dr. Kang a. Unsolicited Medical Personnel Volunteering at Disaster Scenes (A11) 10:40 am 18. State Legislative/Regulatory Committee Dr. Haddock (phone) a. Distracted and Impaired Driving (A22) 10:55 am 19. EMS Committee Dr. Goodloe a. Preventing Occupational Fentanyl and Fentanyl Analog Exposure to Emergency Responders (A15) 11:15 am b. The Clinical Practice of EMS Medicine (A16) 11:30 am c. The Role of the Physician Medical Director in EMS System Leadership (A17) 11:45 pm LUNCH – Mount Vernon Square (Meeting Level 3) 12:00 pm 20 Clinical Policies Committee Dr. Wolf (phone) a. Mechanical Ventilation (A7) 1:00 pm 21. Clinical Emergency Data Registry Committee Dr. Epstein a. CEDR Quality Measures (A6) 1:15 pm 22. Resolution 11(16) CMS Recognition of Independently Licensed FECs (A26) Dr. Epstein/Ms. Wooster 1:30 pm 23. Alternate Payment Models Task Force Status Report Dr. Bettinger (phone)/Dr.Jaquis 2:00 pm 24. Guiding Principles for Interactions with External Entities (A30) Mr. Heard 2:20 pm 25. EvidenceCare (A29) Mr. Heard 2:40 pm BREAK 3:00 pm Timed Agenda – October 26, 2017 Page 3 26. Emergency Medicine Practice Committee Dr. Turturro (phone) a. Sub-Dissociative Dose Ketamine (A13) 3:15 pm 27. Diversity & Inclusion Task Force Interim Report (A12) Dr. Liferidge 3:30 pm ADJOURN 4:00 pm Memorandum To: Board of Directors Council Officers From: John Skiendzielewski, MD, FACEP Chair, Compensation Committee Date: October 13, 2017 Subj: Board Member and Officer Stipends for 2017-18 Recommendations 1. That the Global Stipend Pool be increased by 10% for all Board member and officer positions effective November 1, 2017 through October 31, 2018. 2. That the Board address the key recommendations included in the Governance Assessment report from Nelson Strategic Consulting. Background The Compensation Committee’s primary objective is to establish stipends for Board members, Board officers, and the Council officers. The committee acknowledged that stipends for non-officer Board members and all officer positions, except for the chair, have not increased since the 2011-12 term and that the CPI has increased approximately 8.1% cumulatively since 2011 (Attachment A). The 10% increase applied to each officer and non-officer Board member stipend will reflect the following annual stipend amounts: President $139,933 President-Elect $101,759 Chair $33,713 Vice President $33,713 Secretary-Treasurer $33,713 Immediate Past President $33,713 Speaker ` $33,713 Vice Speaker $17,371 Non-Officer Board Members $10,428 The committee also reviewed the Governance Assessment report (Attachment B) from Nelson Strategic Consulting and discussed the recommendations contained in the report. The report will need extensive discussion by the Board and perhaps that could occur at the upcoming Board retreat since there is inadequate time for the discussion at the October 26 Board meeting. The Governance Assessment report highlighted significant inefficiencies and potentially unnecessary workload of the ACEP Board, some of which are contrary to best practices for a Board of Directors. As stated in the report, “Before long-lasting change can occur, Board consensus that change is needed must occur.” The majority opinion of the Compensation Committee supported the 10% increase at this time, but that additional increases should not be considered until the Board addresses the key recommendations in the report, which include: Board Member and Officer Stipends for 2017-18 Page 2 • Culture Change • Workload Reduction • Diversity • Board Development/Training • Section and Committee Board Liaison Activity • Number of Board Meetings • Residency Visits • Chapter Visits • Nominations/Campaigning Practices • Governance Structure – including appointing a task force as recommended in the report to analyze the current governance system comprised of current and former members of the Board Should the Board disagree with the committee’s recommendations for stipends, the committee will consider such feedback with the understanding that the global pool for stipends will remain constant. If the committee agrees with modifications suggested by the Board, the approval will be communicated to the Board no later than the November 1, 2017, Board meeting. However, consistent with the Bylaws, the committee reserves the right to disregard the Board’s recommendation for revision. The Board would then have the right to not accept the committee recommendation and appeal directly to the Council as described in the Bylaws. The basis for the Compensation Committee resides in the ACEP Bylaws, Article XI – Committees, Section 7 – Compensation Committee, which states: “College officers and members of the Board of Directors may be compensated, the amount and manner of which shall be determined annually by the Compensation Committee. This committee shall be composed of the chair of the Finance Committee plus four members of the College who are currently neither officers nor members of the Board of Directors. The Compensation Committee chair, the Finance Committee chair, plus one other member shall be presidential appointments and two members shall be appointed by the speaker. Members of this committee shall be appointed to staggered terms of not less than two (2) years. The recommendations of this committee shall be submitted annually for review by the Board of Directors and, if accepted, shall be reported to the Council at the next annual meeting. The recommendations may be rejected by a three-quarters vote of the entire Board of Directors, in which event the Board must determine the compensation or request that the committee reconsider. In the event the Board of Directors chooses to reject the recommendations of the Compensation Committee and determine the compensation, the proposed change shall not take effect unless ratified by a majority of councillors voting at the next annual meeting. If the Council does not ratify the Board’s proposed compensation, the Compensation Committee’s recommendation will then take effect.” Fiscal Impact The FY 17-18 budget includes funds for stipends at the 2016-17 amounts. The budget for stipends would increase by $31,606 to increase the stipends by 10% for the remainder of the fiscal year for the current number of Board members and officers. The total for a full twelve months of these proposed stipends would be $521,480 for the current number of Board members and officers. Should the number of Board members change because of the elections
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Revisiting Accountability Concept and Practices in Makassar, Indonesia (A Study on 2 Private and Public Hospitals)
    Revisiting Accountability Concept and Practices in Makassar, Indonesia (A Study on 2 Private and Public Hospitals) Indrianty Sudirman1, Andi Indahwaty Sidin2, dan Nurdjanah Hamid3 {[email protected]} Universitas Hasanuddin, Indonesia1, 2, 3 Abstract. Public and private hospitals have their own characteristics and uniqueness in their management. This research aims to develop an accountability model of public and private hospitals that are able to meet the interests of multi-stakeholders, especially in the era of health service reform. The result shows that the management system in the Public Hospital tends to be systematic and measurable compared to the Private Hospital which tends to be more independent. Keywords: Accountability, Public and Private Hospitals, Health Care Reformation 1 Introduction Hospital accountability is important to accommodate changes and pressures in healthcare reform [1][2][3][4][5], especially with the existence of a national health financing institution whose role is to control accountable health management for multi stakeholders [3][6]. Accountability reporting policies of government agencies are still generic and vertical. Accountability literature is still traditional because it focuses more on vertical accountability and financial aspects, therefore it is less effective in assessing hospital accountability in accordance with the demands of the New Public Management [7][8]. In Indonesia, the adoption of Presidential Regulation No. 12 on National Health Insurance can have implications for hospital quality, ethics, and management. There is no specific and comprehensive mechanism and dimension of accountability assessment for hospitals even though an accountable hospital can provide effective, efficient and equitable health services. Government and private hospitals have their own characteristics and uniqueness in its management.
    [Show full text]
  • Association Between Patient Outcomes and Accreditation in US Hospitals
    RESEARCH Association between patient outcomes and accreditation in US BMJ: first published as 10.1136/bmj.k4011 on 18 October 2018. Downloaded from hospitals: observational study Miranda B Lam,1,2 Jose F Figueroa,3,4 Yevgeniy Feyman,2 Kimberly E Reimold,2 E John Orav,5 Ashish K Jha2,3,4 1Department of Radiation ABSTRACT RESULTS Oncology, Brigham and OBJECTIVES Patients treated at accredited hospitals had lower Women’s Hospital/Dana Farber 30 day mortality rates (although not statistically Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, To determine whether patients admitted to US USA hospitals that are accredited have better outcomes significant lower rates, based on the prespecified P 2Department of Health Policy than those admitted to hospitals reviewed through value threshold) than those at hospitals that were and Management, Harvard T H state surveys, and whether accreditation by The reviewed by a state survey agency (10.2% v 10.6%, Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA 02115, USA Joint Commission (the largest and most well known difference 0.4% (95% confidence interval 0.1% to 3Department of Medicine, accrediting body with an international presence) 0.8%), P=0.03), but nearly identical rates of mortality Harvard Medical School, confers any additional benefits for patients for the six surgical conditions (2.4% v 2.4%, 0.0% Boston, MA, USA 4Department of Medicine, compared with other independent accrediting (−0.3% to 0.3%), P=0.99). Readmissions for the Division of General Internal organizations. 15 medical conditions at 30 days were significantly Medicine, Brigham and lower at accredited hospitals than at state survey Women’s Hospital, Boston, DESIGN MA, USA Observational study.
    [Show full text]
  • Lunch and Learn Series
    Joint Commission Update 2017 PharMEDium Lunch and Learn Series LUNCH AND LEARN Joint Commission Update 2017 June 9, 2017 Featured Speaker: Kurt A. Patton, MS, RPh President Emeritus Patton Healthcare Consulting, LLC CE Activity Information & Accreditation ProCE, Inc. (Pharmacist and Tech CE) 1.0 contact hour Funding: This activity is self‐funded through PharMEDium. It is the policy of ProCE, Inc. to ensure balance, independence, objectivity and scientific rigor in all of its continuing education activities. Faculty must disclose to participants the existence of any significant financial interest or any other relationship with the manufacturer of any commercial product(s) discussed in an educational presentation. Mr. Patton has served as a consultant for Patton Healthcare Consulting. 2 ProCE, Inc. www.ProCE.com 1 Joint Commission Update 2017 PharMEDium Lunch and Learn Series Online Evaluation, Self-Assessment and CE Credit . Submission of an online self‐assessment and evaluation is the only way to obtain CE credit for this webinar . Go to www.ProCE.com/PharMEDiumRx . Print your CE Statement online . Live CE Deadline: July 7, 2017 . CPE Monitor – CE information automatically uploaded to NABP/CPE Monitor upon completion of the self‐assessment and evaluation (user must complete the “claim credit” step) Attendance Code Code will be provided at the end of today’s activity Attendance Code not needed for On‐Demand 3 Ask a Question . Submit your questions to your site manager. Questions will be answered at the end of the presentation. Your question. ? 4 ProCE, Inc. www.ProCE.com 2 Joint Commission Update 2017 PharMEDium Lunch and Learn Series Resources .
    [Show full text]
  • International Healthcare Accreditation: an Analysis of Clinical Quality and Patient Experience in the UAE
    International Healthcare Accreditation: an Analysis of Clinical Quality and Patient Experience in the UAE Subashnie Devkaran, FACHE, MScHCM, BSc (Physiotherapy), CPHQ, Edinburgh Business School, Heriot-Watt University Submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy April 2014 The copyright in this thesis is owned by the author. Any quotation from the thesis or use of any of the information contained in it must acknowledge this thesis as the source of the quotation or information. I ABSTRACT A mixed method research design was used to answer the question; ‘does accreditation have an impact on hospital quality, clinical measures and patient experience?’ The thesis contains three study components: 1) A case study determining the predictors of patient experience; 2) a cross-sectional study examining the relationship of hospital accreditation and patient experience and 3) A four year time series analysis of the impact of accreditation on hospital quality using 27 quality measures. A case study analysis of patient experience, using a piloted, validated and reliable survey tool, was conducted in Al Noor Hospital. The survey was administered via face- to-face interviews to 391 patients. Patient demographic variables, stay characteristics and patient experience constructs were tested against five patient experience outcome measures using regression analysis. The predictors of positive patient experience were the patient demographics (age, nationality, and health status), hospital stay characteristics (length of stay and hospital treatment outcome) and patient experience constructs (care from nurses, care from doctors, cleanliness, pain management and quality of food). Recommendations were made on how hospital managers can improve patient experience using these modifiable factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Dnv Gl - Healthcare Accreditation Program Frequently Asked Questions
    DNV GL - HEALTHCARE ACCREDITATION PROGRAM FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS Who is DNV GL - Healthcare? DNV GL - Healthcare is an operating company of DNV GL – Business Assurance and The DNV GL Group. DNV GL - Healthcare has corporate offices in Houston, Texas and Cincinnati, Ohio. DNV GL is an international organization with 300 offices in over 100 countries and more than 16,000 employees. DNV GL was established in 1864 in Oslo, Norway and has had operations in the United States since 1898. The corporate purpose of DNV GL is safeguarding life, property, and the environment. DNV GL has a worldwide reputation for quality and integrity in certification, standards development and risk management in a wide range of industries, including extensive international healthcare experience. On September 26, 2008 the US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) approved DNV GL - Healthcare by granting it deeming authority for hospitals. Any hospitals accredited by DNV GL - Healthcare after that date is deemed to be in compliance with the Medicare Conditions of Participation (CoPs). Who manages DNV GL - Healthcare? DNV GL - Healthcare is managed by a dedicated group of degreed professionals, each with many years of experience in their respective field of healthcare management, clinical services, health law, ISO certification and engineering. The accreditation management team has extensive healthcare operational experience in the U.S. and understands the dynamics of a complex healthcare organization. What does NIAHO® stand for? NIAHO® is the acronym for the National Integrated Accreditation for Healthcare Organizations. NIAHO® is the name of the DNV GL’s hospital accreditation program. The NIAHO® standards integrate requirements based on the CMS Conditions of Participation (CoPs) with the internationally recognized ISO 9001 Standard for the formation and implementation of the Quality Management System.
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan Hospital Guide to Emergency Management: Linking the Hospital Preparedness Program with Joint Commission Success
    Michigan Hospital Guide to Emergency Management: Linking the Hospital Preparedness Program with Joint Commission Success January 2012 Michigan Hospital Guide to Emergency Management: Linking the Hospital Preparedness Program with Joint Commission Success January 2012 (c) 2012 Emergency Management Standards and Elements of Performance, The Joint Commission. The Emergency Management Standards and Elements of Performance that appear in this book are reproduced with the permission of The Joint Commission. This material may not be reproduced without the written permission of The Joint Commission. MICHIGAN HOSPITAL GUIDE TO EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT: LINKING THE January HOSPITAL PREPAREDNESS PROGRAM WITH JOINT COMMISSION SUCCESS 2012 Table of Contents Page Tab Introduction 5 1 Matrix Terminology 6 2 Hospital Preparedness Program Joint Commission Background 8 3 Hospital Preparedness Program (HPP) Value 9 3 EM.01.01.01 The hospital engages in planning activities prior to developing its written Emergency Operations Plan HPP & TJC Linkage 10 4 EP 1-EP-8 Opportunities, Resources, and Examples 12 4 EM.01.01.01 Quick Summary 14 4 EM.02.01.01 The hospital has an Emergency Operations Plan HPP & TJC Linkage 15 4 EP 1-EP 8 Opportunities, Resources, and Examples 18 4 EM.02.01.01 Quick Summary 21 4 EM.02.02.01 The hospital prepares for how it communicates during emergencies HPP & TJC Linkage 22 4 EP 1-EP 17 Opportunities, Resources, and Examples 24 4 EM.02.02.01 Quick Summary 27 4 EM.02.02.03 The hospital prepares how it will manage resources and assets during
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of CBAHI Accreditation on Critical Care Unit Outcome Quality Measures: a Case Study
    International Journal of Health Sciences and Research www.ijhsr.org ISSN: 2249-9571 Case Study The Impact of CBAHI Accreditation on Critical Care Unit Outcome Quality Measures: A Case Study Zuber Mujeeb Shaikh1, Dr. Awad Al-Omari2, Adnaan Ahmed3 1FISQua (Ireland), PhD, MPhil, MHM, Director, Corporate Quality Improvement, Dr. Sulaiman Al-Habib Medical Group, Riyadh-11643, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 2MD, Associate Vice President -Academic Affairs, Medical Director for ICU’s, Dr. Sulaiman Al-Habib Medical Group, AlFaisal University, Riyadh-11643, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 3MBA, Manager, Corporate Quality Improvement, Dr. Sulaiman Al-Habib Medical Group, Riyadh-11643, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Corresponding Author: Zuber Mujeeb Shaikh ABSTRACT Quality indicators are the tools to measure the patient safety, effectiveness, equity, patient- centeredness, timeliness, and efficiency as defined by the Institute of Medicine (IOM). These measures are also categorized as structure, process and outcome by Dr. Avedis Donabedian. Objectives: To study the impact of the Central Board for Accreditation of Healthcare Institutions (CBAHI) Accreditation on the outcome measures of critical care units in a tertiary care hospital. Methods: This is a library research methodology, in which the analysis of historical records and data was done before and after the CBAHI Accreditation. Significance of Research: It was observed during pre CBAHI Accreditation (from May 2016 to October 2016) and post CBAHI Accreditation (November 2016 to April 2017) that there was no significant improvement in the outcome measures of Critical Care Units. Hypothesis: Null Hypothesis (Ho) and Alternative Hypothesis (H1) were used and tested to compare the pre CBAHI and post CBHAI impact.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulations and Standards
    Regulations and Standards Presentation to: Basic Healthcare Emergency Management Course Objectives • Understand the regulatory context in which healthcare facilities/systems operate • Identify the accreditation Standards • Identify applicable regulatory agency for your facility and organization • Identify the current standards, frameworks, and key organizations in healthcare management Context of Healthcare Emergency Management These organizations can be grouped into the following categories: • Accrediting organizations • Regulatory organizations • Standard-setting bodies • Providers of guidance, grants, and training • Governmental agencies Accreditation Many accrediting bodies exists for all types of healthcare settings, for example: • The Joint Commission (TJC) • DNV Healthcare, Inc. (DNV) • Accreditation Commission for Health Care (ACHC) • Health Facilities Accreditation Program (HFAP) • Community Health Accreditation Program (CHAP) Regulation Regulation of healthcare facilities and systems is conducted by overlapping federal, state, and local agencies State and Local Standards and Regulations • Most regulatory requirements for individual healthcare facilities are established and enforced at the state and local level (Healthcare Facility Regulation, HFR-formerly ORS) • State and local agencies have standards and regulations specific to every jurisdiction in the country State and Local Standards and Regulations • Some jurisdictions have specific emergency management provisions • Some topics related to emergency management include: -
    [Show full text]
  • Urban Hospital Emergency Department Program Alberta Health Services Table of Contents
    September 2020 Urban Hospital Emergency Department Program Alberta Health Services Table of Contents About this Accreditation Report ................................................................................................................... 3 About the AHS Accreditation Cycle ........................................................................................................... 3 Emergency Department Program Assessment– Sites Visited ................................................................... 4 Confidentiality ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Surveyor Observations .............................................................................................................................. 5 Survey Methodology ................................................................................................................................. 6 Key Opportunities and Areas of Excellence .............................................................................................. 7 Results at a Glance ........................................................................................................................................ 8 Compliance Overall ..................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Assignments of Nurses in the Hospital Accreditation Process
    Available online at http://www.journalijdr.com International Journal of Development Research ISSN: 2230-9926 Vol. 10, Issue, 08, pp. 39489-39494, August, 2020 https://doi.org/10.37118/ijdr.19611.08.2020 RESEARCH ARTICLE OPEN ACCESS ASSIGNMENTS OF NURSES IN THE HOSPITAL ACCREDITATION PROCESS *1Rosane da Silva Santana, 2Rosa Irlania do Nascimento Pereira, 3Elis Jordana Crispim Alencar, 2Cynthia Araújo Frota, 2Francisca Ellen Bantim Sousa Cunha, 3Midian Viana Dias, 4Nanielle Silva Barbosa, 4Amanda Karoliny Meneses Resende, 4Kauan Gustavo de Carvalho, 5Cristiana Pacífico Oliveira, 6Gabriela Oliveira Parentes da Costa and 7Ricardo Clayton Silva Jansen 1PhD student in Public Health - Federal University of Ceará - (UFC) Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil 2Nurse. Maurício Nassau University Center - (UNINASSAU) - Teresina, Piauí, Brazil 3Nurse. Santo Agostinho University Center (FSA) Teresina, Piauí, Brazil 4Nurse. State University of Piauí - (UESPI) - Teresina, Piauí, Brazil 5Postgraduate in Family Health. Federal University of Piauí - (UFPI) Teresina, Piauí, Brazil 6Postgraduate degree in Urgency and Emergency - Multiple Higher Education Institute (IESM) 7Nurse. Master in Biodiversity, Environment and Health – UEMA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT ArticleArticle History: History: Introduction: The effective performance of nurses in care and administrative actions subsidizes th ReceivedReceived 17xxxxxx, May 20192020 the Hospital Accreditation process, which is a certification for health institutions through ReceivedReceived inin revisedrevised formform compliance with established goals and rules. Thus, the objective was to identify the th 09xxxxxxxx, June 2020 201 9 th administrative and care attributions of nurses in the Hospital Accreditation process. Materials AcceptedAccepted 20xxxxxxxxx July 2020, 20 19 and Methods: descriptive study with qualitative approach, conducted in August and September Published online 30th August 2020 Published online xxxxx, 2019 of 2018 with 14 nurses.
    [Show full text]
  • Accreditation of Hospitals and Medical Education Institutions–Challenges and Future Directions
    REGIONAL COMMITTEE FOR THE EM/RC50/Tech.Disc.1 EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN August 2003 Fiftieth Session Original: Arabic Agenda item 7 TECHNICAL DISCUSSIONS ACCREDITATION OF HOSPITALS AND MEDICAL EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS–CHALLENGES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS A. HOSPITALS EM/RC50/Tech.Disc.1 CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................I 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Quality improvement and accreditation .................................................................. 1 1.2 Hospitals and health system reform ........................................................................ 1 1.3 The role of WHO in regional accreditation initiatives ............................................ 2 2. THE EMRO MODEL OF HOSPITAL ACCREDITATION............................................. 3 2.1 Major features.......................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Levels, standards and performance indicators ........................................................ 4 3. CHALLENGES IN IMPLEMENTING HOSPITAL ACCREDITATION ....................... 5 4. STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING HOSPITAL ACCREDITATION IN THE REGION................................................................................................................... 7 5. CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • AHRQ Quality Indicators Fact Sheet
    AHRQ Quality Indicators Toolkit Fact Sheet on Inpatient Quality Indicators What are the Inpatient Quality Indicators? The Inpatient Quality Indicators (IQIs) include 28 provider-level indicators established by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) that can be used with hospital inpatient discharge data to provide a perspective on quality. They are grouped into the following four sets: • Volume indicators are proxy, or indirect, measures of quality based on counts of admissions during which certain intensive, high-technology, or highly complex procedures were performed. They are based on evidence suggesting that hospitals performing more of these procedures may have better outcomes. • Mortality indicators for inpatient procedures include procedures for which mortality has been shown to vary across institutions and for which there is evidence that high mortality may be associated with poorer quality of care. • Mortality indicators for inpatient conditions include conditions for which mortality has been shown to vary substantially across institutions and for which evidence suggests that high mortality may be associated with deficiencies in the quality of care. • Utilization indicators examine procedures whose use varies significantly across hospitals and for which questions have been raised about overuse, underuse, or misuse. Mortality for Selected Procedures and Mortality for Selected Conditions are composite measures that AHRQ established in 2008. Each composite is estimated as a weighted average, across a set of IQIs, of the ratio of a hospital’s observed rate (OR) to its expected rate (ER), based on a reference population: OR/ER. The IQI-specific ratios are adjusted for reliability before they are averaged, to minimize the influence of ratios that are high or low at a specific hospital by chance.
    [Show full text]