DOCSLIB.ORG

Quality and Accreditation in Health Care Services: a Global Review Resulted from a Study Conducted by the International Society for Quality in Health Quality And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Quality and Accreditation in Health Care Services: a Global Review Resulted from a Study Conducted by the International Society for Quality in Health Quality And WHO/EIP/OSD/2003.1 QUALITY AND ACCREDIT QUALITY Quality and accreditation in health care services: a global review resulted from a study conducted by the International Society for Quality in Health Quality and Care (ISQua) under contract to the World Health Organization. The first of A this report’s three parts describes structures and activities at national and TION IN HEAL international levels around the world to promote quality in health care. accreditation The second part catalogues quality concepts and tools in local use in various countries. The third part outlines initiatives in health service accreditation in health care and analyses the operation of functioning national programmes around the world. The appendices include recommendations of major international TH CARE SERVICES: TH services bodies and meetings on quality assurance. A global review A GLOBAL REVIEW Evidence and Information for Policy Department of Health Service Provision (OSD) World Health Organization 1211 Geneva 27 Switzerland WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION http://www.who.int WHO GENEVA WHO/EIP/OSD/2003.1 Quality and accreditation in health care services A GLOBAL REVIEW Evidence and Information for Policy Department of Health Service Provision WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION Geneva 2003 © World Health Organization 2003 All rights reserved. Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from Marketing and Dissemination, World Health Organization, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland (tel: +41 22 791 2476; fax: +41 22 791 4857; email: [email protected]). Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications – whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution – should be addressed to Publications, at the above address (fax: +41 22 791 4806; email: [email protected]). The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion what- soever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its author- ities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement. The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters. The World Health Organization does not warrant that the information contained in this publication is complete and correct and shall not be liable for any damages incurred as a result of its use. Designed by minimum graphics Typeset in Hong Kong Printed in Malta Contents Acknowledgements ix Foreword xi Preface xiii Section 1. International and national structures and activities for improving health care 1 Summary 3 Background 3 Sources 3 Purpose and scope of Section 1 4 Methods 4 Specific elements 4 Sources used 4 International structures and activities 6 Intergovernmental organizations 6 International funding organizations 15 International nongovernmental organizations 18 Other international resources 20 National structures and activities 24 Published national strategies 24 National reviews 27 National structures for quality 29 National quality initiatives 32 National resources 35 Discussion 39 Policy 40 Structure and management 42 Quality tools and methods 42 Resources 42 Conclusion 44 References 44 Section 2. Quality concepts and tools 51 Summary 53 Management concepts 53 Standards and measurements 53 Implementing change 53 Resources for quality improvement 54 Purpose and scope of Section 2 54 Methods 54 Specific elements 54 Sources used 55 Quality concepts 56 Quality management systems 56 External assessment 58 iii Quality tools 62 Population and community 62 Consumers, users and clients 64 Staff welfare 65 Staff competence 68 Clinical practice 69 Service delivery 76 Risk, health and safety 78 Resource management 81 Communications 82 Implementing change 83 Policy 85 Organization 85 Project methods 85 Change management 86 Involving the public 88 Resources for quality improvement 89 References 90 Section 3. Health service accreditation programmes 103 Summary 105 Sources 105 Findings 105 Purpose and scope of Section 3 105 Methods 106 Sources used 106 Data collection and management 106 Health service accreditation: summaries by country 107 Argentina 107 Armenia 107 Australia 107 Austria 107 Belgium 107 Bermuda 108 Bhutan 108 Bosnia and Herzegovina 108 Brazil 108 Canada 108 Colombia 108 Czech Republic 108 Denmark 108 Dominican Republic 108 Ecuador 109 Estonia 109 Finland 109 France 109 Germany 109 Hungary 109 India 109 Indonesia 109 Ireland 110 Italy 110 Japan 110 Kyrgyzstan 110 iv QUALITY AND ACCREDITATION IN HEALTH CARE SERVICES: A GLOBAL REVIEW Lithuania 110 Luxembourg 111 Malaysia 111 Mongolia 111 Morocco 111 Netherlands 111 New Zealand 111 Philippines 111 Poland 111 Portugal 111 Republic of Korea 112 Singapore 112 Slovak Republic 112 South Africa 112 Spain 112 Switzerland 112 Thailand 112 Turkey 113 United Kingdom 113 United States of America 113 Zambia 113 Survey findings and analysis 113 Distribution of responses 114 Legal framework 115 Relationship to government 115 Year of origin 116 Programme coverage 117 Public access to standards 118 Revision of standards 119 Country of inspiration 120 Site visits 120 Public access to reports 121 Survey activity 121 Surveyor activity 122 Expenditure and costs 123 Income 125 Reflections 125 Completeness of the review 125 Accuracy 125 Observations 126 References 127 Appendices Appendix 1.1 Recommendations to Member States on quality assurance, WHO Regional Committee for Europe, 1988 131 Appendix 1.2 Recommendations of the WHO Working Group on Quality Assurance in Health Care, Kiel, 1988 134 Appendix 1.3 Recommendations of the International Consultation on Quality Assurance in District Health Systems, Pyongyang, 1992 135 Appendix 1.4 Recommendations of the Hospital Advisory Group, 1994 137 Appendix 1.5 Recommendations of the WHO Working Group on Quality Assurance, Geneva, 1994 142 CONTENTS v Appendix 1.6 Recommendations of the pre-ISQua Meeting on Quality Assurance Methodologies in Developing Countries, St Johns, 1995 144 Appendix 1.7 Recommendations of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, 1997 146 Appendix 1.8 Recommendations of the WHO/ISQua Workshop on Quality Improvement for Middle and Low Income Countries, Dublin, 2000 149 Appendix 1.9 Recommendations of the WHO Anglophone Intercountry Meeting, Kampala, 2000 150 Appendix 1.10 Questions for a national quality strategy in developing countries 151 Appendix 1.11 National societies for quality (organizations known to ISQua) 153 Appendix 2.1 Classification of quality concepts and tools 154 Appendix 3.1 Specimen survey form 156 Appendix 3.2 Responding programmes 158 Appendix 3.3 Argentina 160 Appendix 3.4 Australia, ACHS 162 Appendix 3.5 Australia, AGPAL 163 Appendix 3.6 Australia, QIC 165 Appendix 3.7 Bosnia and Herzegovina 166 Appendix 3.8 Brazil 167 Appendix 3.9 Canada 168 Appendix 3.10 Colombia 170 Appendix 3.11 Czech Republic 172 Appendix 3.12 Finland 173 Appendix 3.13 France 174 Appendix 3.14 Germany 175 Appendix 3.15 Indonesia 177 Appendix 3.16 Ireland 178 Appendix 3.17 Italy 179 Appendix 3.18 Japan 181 Appendix 3.19 Malaysia 182 Appendix 3.20 Mongolia 184 Appendix 3.21 Netherlands 185 Appendix 3.22 New Zealand 186 Appendix 3.23 Poland 188 Appendix 3.24 Portugal 189 Appendix 3.25 Slovak Republic 190 Appendix 3.26 South Africa 191 Appendix 3.27 Spain 192 Appendix 3.28 Switzerland 194 Appendix 3.29 Thailand 196 Appendix 3.30 United Kingdom, HQS 197 Appendix 3.31 United Kingdom, HAP 199 Appendix 3.32 United Kingdom, CSB 200 Appendix 3.33 United States of America 201 Appendix 3.34 Zambia 202 Appendix 3.35 Abbreviations and acronyms 203 Index 205 vi QUALITY AND ACCREDITATION IN HEALTH CARE SERVICES: A GLOBAL REVIEW Tables Table 1.1 Quality assurance review meetings for developing countries, 1993–2000 7 Table 1.2 WHO publications on quality since 1990 8 Table 1.3 WHO Regional Offices 8 Table 1.4 WHO African Region meetings on quality improvement 9 Table 1.5 WHO Eastern Mediterranean Region workshop reports and publications 10 Table 1.6 WHO European Region workshop reports and publications 12 Table 1.7 WHO South-East Asia Region selected workshop reports and publications 13 Table 1.8 Quality-related research projects of the European Union 14 Table 1.9 Selected World Bank quality improvement projects 16 Table 1.10 International nongovernmental organizations 18 Table 1.11 ISQua international conferences 19 Table 1.12 Principal Cochrane web sites 20 Table 1.13 IHI/BMJ Forum meetings 21 Table 1.14 Examples of QAP projects 22 Table 1.15 Selected international journals related to quality 23 Table 1.16 Selected major quality awards and industrial quality organizations 24 Table 1.17 Examples of legislation for quality in health care 25 Table 1.18 Examples of national policies for quality in health care 26 Table 1.19 Examples of recent reports and national reviews on quality 27 Table 1.20 Examples of national quality policy groups or councils 29 Table 1.21 Examples of national executive agencies 30 Table 1.22 Selected national societies for quality in health care 31 Table 1.23 Examples of government quality initiatives 33 Table 1.24 Selected government guides to quality 34 Table 1.25 Examples of data
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Health Services Research: What Is
    Health Service Research: What is it? Michael Weiner, M.D., M.P.H. Associate Professor of Medicine Indiana University School of Medicine Division of General Internal Medicine & Geriatrics Indiana University Center for Health Services and Outcomes Research VA HSR&D Center for Health Information and Communication Regenstrief Institute, Inc. Indianapolis, Indiana, U.S.A. mailto:[email protected] Presentation for ASHFoundation Implementation Science Summit 20 March 2014 Disclosure • Michael Weiner • Associate Professor of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis • Speaker Disclosures • No relevant financial relationships • No relevant non-financial relationships • The views expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Goals for Today • Define health services research (HSR) • Learn about key concepts and methods used in HSR • Consider HSR’s relevance to implementation science Definition What is a health service? • “All services dealing with the diagnosis and treatment of disease, or the promotion, maintenance, and restoration of health.” • Includes personal and non-personal health services. • “Service provision refers to the way inputs such as money, staff, equipment, and drugs are combined to allow the delivery of health interventions.” • Factors needed to improve access, coverage, and quality of services • Availability of services • Organization and management of services • Incentives influencing providers and users http://www.who.int/topics/health_services/en/ Definition of health services research • Organizational structures and • Access to care processes • Quality • Health technologies •Costs • Social factors • Health • Financing systems • Personal behaviors • Domains: individuals, families, organizations, institutions, communities, and populations Lohr KN, Steinwachs DM. Health Serv Res. 2002 Feb;37(1):7-9.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Value-Driven Health Care Purchasing: Four States That Are Ahead of the Curve
    VALUE-DRIVEN HEALTH CARE PURCHASING: FOUR STATES THAT ARE AHEAD OF THE CURVE OVERVIEW Sharon Silow-Carroll and Tanya Alteras Health Management Associates August 2007 ABSTRACT: Health care purchasers, suppliers, and consumers are rallying for better-quality health care. In response, several states are pursuing value-based purchasing (VBP) initiatives that emphasize collection of quality-of-care data, transparency of quality and cost information, and incentives. In this overview of public–private VBP efforts in Massachusetts, Minnesota, Washington, and Wisconsin, the authors find that tiered premiums, pay-for-performance measures, and the designation of high-performance providers as “centers of excellence” are paying off. Minnesota, for example, has used incentives to achieve about $20 million in savings in 2006. Similarly, Wisconsin’s Department of Employee Trust Funds has announced premium rate increases in the single digits for the third straight year. More research is necessary to determine the true impact of VBP, but health plans and providers are paying attention to and learning from these current efforts. (Note: Accompanying the overview report are four separate state case studies, available at http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/publications_show.htm?doc_id=515778.) Support for this research was provided by The Commonwealth Fund. The views presented here are those of the authors and not necessarily those of The Commonwealth Fund or its directors, officers, or staff. This report and other Fund publications are available online at www.commonwealthfund.org. To learn more about new publications when they become available, visit the Fund’s Web site and register to receive e-mail alerts. Commonwealth Fund pub.
    [Show full text]
  • Quality Health Care
    . Quality Health Care • Centers of Excellence • Improving Quality Quality Health Care Quality • Pay for Performance • Literature Centers of Excellence The term “Center of Excellence” has been widely used and in many different ways. The basic concept behind health care centers of excellence is that a provider who specializes in a particular type of program or service can produce better outcomes. One example of a center of excellence program is the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) cancer center program that was created in 1971 to establish regional centers of excellence in cancer research and patient care. The NCI cancer center designation is an official designation. Providers must meet certain criteria and demonstrate excellence in research, cancer prevention and clinical services. NCI designation helps institutions compete for both research dollars and patients. The term “Center of Excellence” has also been used by many without official designation. Some providers of care simply proclaim themselves centers of excellence. This is especially true for specialty hospitals that have been proliferated in many parts of the country. While these facilities may specialize in a particular service, there may not be clinical evidence demonstrating that the care they provide is superior. Similarly, insurers may include "Centers of Excellence" in their networks, but the extent to which these facilities have met established performance benchmarks is not always clear. While some insurers go to great length to identify the highest quality providers for certain services, others may establish a "Center of Excellence" primarily to concentrate volume to achieve more favorable payment rates. Much of the literature on Centers of Excellence has focuses on the relationship between volume and outcomes.
    [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]
  • Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice
    Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice Health Services Research Doctoral Program Handbook 2019-2020 Academic Year Health Services Research Doctoral Program Handbook Dear Students, Welcome to the Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice PhD program in Health Services Research at Brown University’s School of Public Health. This handbook provides information about the policies and procedures to guide the completion of your doctoral degree. Information about University Doctoral and Graduate student policies can be found in the Graduate School Handbook. Inside this handbook, you will find information about degree requirements, financial support and mentoring. We hope that this is a useful resource to you during your time in the program. Yours Sincerely, Amal Trivedi, MD, MPH Graduate Program Director 2 Health Services Research Doctoral Program Handbook PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ............................................................................................................... 4 ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................................................ 5 BASIC DEGREE REQUIREMENTS ................................................................................................. 5 OTHER REQUIREMENTS TO GRADUATE .................................................................................. 6 Journal Club and Faculty Forum ............................................................................................................................. 6 Seminars ....................................................................................................................................................................
    [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]
  • 2018 National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report
    NATIONAL HEALTHCARE QUALITY & DISPARITIES REPORT 2018 2015 National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report and National Quality Stategy 5th Anniversary Update c This document is in the public domain and may be used and reprinted without permission. Citation of the source is appreciated. Suggested citation: 2018 National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; September 2019. AHRQ Pub. No. 19-0070-EF. 2018 NATIONAL HEALTHCARE QUALITY AND DISPARITIES REPORT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, MD 20857 www.ahrq.gov AHRQ Publication No. 19-0070-EF September 2019 www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/nhqrdr/index.html ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The National Healthcare Quality and Disparities Report (QDR) is the product of collaboration among agencies from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), other federal departments, and the private sector. Many individuals guided and contributed to this effort. Without their magnanimous support, the report would not have been possible. Specifically, we thank: Primary AHRQ Staff: Gopal Khanna, Francis Chesley, Virginia Mackay-Smith, Jeff Brady, Erin Grace, Karen Chaves, Nancy Wilson, Darryl Gray, Barbara Barton, Doreen Bonnett, and Irim Azam. HHS Interagency Workgroup (IWG) for the QDR: Susan Jenkins (ACL), Irim Azam (AHRQ), Barbara Barton (AHRQ), Doreen Bonnett (AHRQ), Karen Chaves (AHRQ), Fran Chevarley (AHRQ), Camille Fabiyi (AHRQ), Darryl Gray (AHRQ), Kevin
    [Show full text]
  • Telehealth After COVID-19: Clarifying Policy Goals for a Way Forward
    January 2021 Perspective EXPERT INSIGHTS ON A TIMELY POLICY ISSUE LORI USCHER-PINES, MONIQUE MARTINEAU Telehealth After COVID-19 Clarifying Policy Goals for a Way Forward n March 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic shut- tered communities and disrupted the health care delivery system. But clini- Icians quickly dusted off their webcams and leveraged telehealth to continue care—and keep their practices afloat—while still meeting social distancing guidelines. Temporary, dramatic policy waivers (see box) broadened access to and payment for telehealth on an unprecedented scale. These policy changes led to skyrocketing telehealth use in spring 2020. At the time, there was a lot of talk about how tele- health’s time had finally arrived, and how genies were not returning to their bottles. But that might be the wrong metaphor for telehealth use in 2020. The surge in tele- health use had ebbed somewhat by the summer months (Mehrotra et al., 2020), and it is too soon to tell whether the initial enthusiasm for virtual visits was borne of desperation (Uscher-Pines, 2020) or whether some of the newfound appreciation for telehealth can persist under the right policy conditions. C O R P O R A T I O N Federal Telehealth Restrictions Temporarily Changed During the Public Health Emergency and Responsible Agency or Legislation Medicare • Expand the types of providers that can furnish and are eligible to bill Medicare for telehealth services (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security [CARES] Act) • Allow providers eligible to bill
    [Show full text]
  • How the Government As a Payer Shapes the Health Care Marketplace by Tevi D
    2014 How the Government as a Payer Shapes the Health Care Marketplace By Tevi D. Troy 2014 2014 American Health Policy Institute (AHPI) is a non-partisan 501(c)(3) think tank, established to examine the impact of health policy on large employers, and to explore and propose policies that will help bolster the ability of large employers to provide quality, affordable health care to employees and their dependents. The Affordable Care Act has catalyzed a national debate about the future of health care in the United States, and the Institute serves to provide thought leadership grounded in the practical experience of America’s largest employers. To learn more, visit ghgvghgghghhg americanhealthpolicy.org. Contents Executive Summary................................................................................. 1 Shaping Business Models ......................................................................... 2 Insurance Premiums ............................................................................... 6 Availability of Innovative Products ....................................................... 7 Quality Measures ..................................................................................... 8 Conclusion ................................................................................................ 9 Endnotes ................................................................................................. 10 Executive Summary The federal government is the largest single payer of health care in the United States1, accounting for
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Impact of Accreditation on a Primary Healthcare Organization in Qatar Alia Ghareeb Walden University
    Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2015 Examining the Impact of Accreditation on a Primary Healthcare Organization in Qatar Alia Ghareeb Walden University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations Part of the Health and Medical Administration Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Walden University College of Health Sciences This is to certify that the doctoral dissertation by Alia Ghareeb has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Suzanne Richins, Committee Chairperson, Health Services Faculty Dr. Sandra Bever, Committee Member, Health Services Faculty Dr. James Rohrer, University Reviewer, Health Services Faculty Chief Academic Officer Eric Riedel, Ph.D. Walden University 2016 Abstract Examining the Impact of Accreditation on a Primary Healthcare Organization in Qatar by Alia Fouad Ghareeb MHCM, California State University of Los Angeles, 2006 BS, Lebanese University Faculty of Science, 2002 Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy College of Health Sciences Walden University February 2016 Abstract Although a modest body of literature exists on accreditation, little research was conducted on the impact of accreditation on primary healthcare organizations in the Middle East. This study assessed the changes resulting from the integration of Accreditation Canada International’s accreditation program in a primary healthcare organization in the State of Qatar.
    [Show full text]