DOCSLIB.ORG

Standards for Hospital Accreditation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Standards for Hospital Accreditation 1910-1919 The Joint Commission: 1920-1929 1950-1959 1960-1969 Over a century of quality and safety 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-2018 Home 1 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1910-1913 1910-1919 Ernest Codman, M.D. proposes the 1920-1929 “end result system of hospital 1950-1959 ⎻ standardization.” 1960-1969 1970-1979 American College of Surgeons is 1980-1989 founded. The “end result” system 1990-1999 ⎻ 2000-2009 becomes an ACS objective. 2010-2018 Home 2 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1917-1918 1910-1919 The American College of 1920-1929 Surgeons develops the 1950-1959 ⎻ Minimum Standard for 1960-1969 1970-1979 Hospitals. Requirements fill 1980-1989 one page. 1990-1999 2000-2009 The ACS begins on-site 2010-2018 inspections of hospitals. Home ⎻ 3 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1926 1910-1919 1920-1929 The first standards manual is 1950-1959 printed, consisting of 18 pages. 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 The American College of Surgeons made the three-story 2010-2018 former residence shown opposite, on Chicago’s rapidly growing north side, its headquarters in 1920. Home 4 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1910-1919 1950-1951 1920-1929 1950-1959 1960-1969 The American College of Physicians, the 1970-1979 American Hospital Association, the 1980-1989 ⎻ 1990-1999 American Medical Association, and the 2000-2009 Canadian Medical Association join with 2010-2018 the ACS as corporate members to create Home the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals (JCAH), an independent, not-for-profit organization, in Chicago, Illinois, whose primary purpose is to provide voluntary accreditation. 5 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1952 The American College of 1910-1919 1920-1929 Surgeons officially transfers its 1950-1959 ⎻ Hospital Standardization 1960-1969 Program to JCAH, which begins 1970-1979 1980-1989 offering accreditation to 1990-1999 hospitals in January 1953. 2000-2009 2010-2018 Edwin L. Crosby, M.D., Home becomes the first director of the ⎻ Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals. 6 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1953-1959 1910-1919 1920-1929 – JCAH publishes Standards for 1950-1959 1960-1969 Hospital Accreditation. 1970-1979 – Kenneth Babcock, M.D., becomes 1980-1989 1990-1999 director of JCAH. 2000-2009 2010-2018 Home 7 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1964-1965 1910-1919 The Joint Commission on 1920-1929 Accreditation of Hospitals begins 1950-1959 ⎻ 1960-1969 charging for surveys. 1970-1979 Congress passes the Social Security 1980-1989 1990-1999 Amendments of 1965 with a provision 2000-2009 ⎻ that hospitals accredited by JCAH are 2010-2018 “deemed” to be in compliance with Home most of the Medicare Conditions of Participation for hospitals and, thus, able to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. John D. Porterfield III, M.D., becomes director of the JCAH. ⎻ 8 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1966-1969 1910-1919 1920-1929 Long term care accreditation begins. 1950-1959 1960-1969 JCAH establishes four accreditation ⎻ 1970-1979 councils to develop standards and survey 1980-1989 ⎻ accreditation procedures. 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-2018 Home 9 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1910-1919 1970 1920-1929 1950-1959 1960-1969 The Accreditation Council for Psychiatric 1970-1979 Facilities is established and accreditation 1980-1989 ⎻ for psychiatric facilities, substance abuse 1990-1999 2000-2009 programs and community mental health 2010-2018 programs begins. Home Accreditation for hospitals and long term care facilities is reduced to a maximum of ⎻ two years from three years. 10 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1971-1972 1910-1919 1920-1929 The Accreditation Council for Long 1950-1959 1960-1969 Term Care is established. 1970-1979 ⎻ 1980-1989 The Social Security Act is amended to 1990-1999 require that the Secretary of the U.S. 2000-2009 ⎻ Department of Health and Human 2010-2018 Services (DHHS) validate JCAH Home findings. The first issue of Perspectives on Accreditation is published. ⎻ 11 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1975-1977 1910-1919 1920-1929 The Accreditation Council for 1950-1959 1960-1969 Ambulatory Health Care is 1970-1979 ⎻ established and accreditation for 1980-1989 ambulatory health care facilities 1990-1999 2000-2009 begins. 2010-2018 John E. Affeldt, M.D., becomes Home president of the JCAH. ⎻ 12 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1978-1979 1910-1919 1920-1929 1950-1959 JCAH establishes an agreement with the 1960-1969 College of American Pathologists to recognize 1970-1979 ⎻ 1980-1989 CAP accreditation of a laboratory in a JCAH- 1990-1999 accredited hospital in lieu of the 2000-2009 Commission’s accreditation of the laboratory. 2010-2018 Home The American Dental Association (ADA) becomes a JCAH corporate member. ⎻ A Professional and Technical Advisory Committee is established for each ⎻ accreditation program, and the Accreditation Councils are disbanded. 13 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1910-1919 1982-1983 1920-1929 1950-1959 1960-1969 The accreditation cycle is changed from two 1970-1979 years to three years for hospitals, psychiatric 1980-1989 ⎻ facilities, alcoholism and substance abuse 1990-1999 2000-2009 programs, community mental health centers, 2010-2018 and long term care organizations. Home Accreditation for hospice care organizations begins. (Folded into the Home Care ⎻ Accreditation program in 1990.) 14 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1910-1919 1986 1920-1929 1950-1959 Quality Healthcare 1960-1969 Resources® (QHR), Inc. is 1970-1979 ⎻ 1980-1989 formed as a not-for-profit 1990-1999 consulting subsidiary of 2000-2009 JCAH. (QHR later becomes 2010-2018 Home Joint Commission Resources.) Dennis S. O’Leary, M.D., becomes president of the ⎻ JCAH. 15 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1987-1989 1910-1919 1920-1929 The organization name changes to the Joint Commission 1950-1959 1960-1969 on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations to reflect an 1970-1979 ⎻ expanded scope of activities. 1980-1989 1990-1999 The Agenda for Change is launched, placing the primary 2000-2009 emphasis of the accreditation process on actual 2010-2018 ⎻ organization performance. Home Development of the Indicator Measurement System® (IMSystem ®) – an indicator-based performance ⎻ monitoring system – gets underway. Accreditation for home care organizations and managed care begins. (Managed care is folded into the Ambulatory ⎻ Care Accreditation program in 1990). 16 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1990 1910-1919 1920-1929 1950-1959 The Joint Commission Headquarters and 1960-1969 Conference Center opens in Oakbrook Terrace, 1970-1979 1980-1989 Illinois, about 20 miles west of downtown Chicago. 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-2018 Home 17 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1992-1993 1910-1919 1920-1929 1950-1959 The Joint Commission issues a standard 1960-1969 requiring all accredited hospitals to have a 1970-1979 ⎻ policy prohibiting smoking in the hospital. 1980-1989 1990-1999 The number and nature of confirmed 2000-2009 substantive complaints filed against 2010-2018 Home ⎻ accredited facilities and the existence of type I recommendations becomes public information. The federal government announces that home health agencies accredited by the Joint ⎻ Commission after an unannounced survey will be “deemed” to meet the Medicare Conditions of Participation. 18 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1994 1910-1919 1920-1929 The first organization-specific performance 1950-1959 1960-1969 reports are released to the public. 1970-1979 ⎻ A new survey process is implemented that 1980-1989 1990-1999 uses a systemwide, cross-department 2000-2009 ⎻ orientation. 2010-2018 Home Quality Healthcare Resources, Inc.® and the Joint Commission form Joint Commission ⎻ International to provide education and consulting services to international clients. 19 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1910-1919 1995 1920-1929 1950-1959 The federal government recognizes Joint 1960-1969 Commission laboratory accreditation services 1970-1979 ⎻ 1980-1989 as meeting the requirements for Clinical 1990-1999 Laboratory Amendments of 1988 (CLIA) 2000-2009 certification. 2010-2018 Home As part of an Action Plan, the Joint Commission launches the Orion Project in ⎻ Pennsylvania and Arizona as a series of experiments designed to test innovations to improve the delivery of accreditation services. Accreditation for freestanding laboratories begins. ⎻ 20 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1996 1910-1919 1920-1929 The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 1950-1959 Services announces that ambulatory 1960-1969 1970-1979 ⎻ surgical centers accredited by the Joint 1980-1989 Commission will be “deemed” as 1990-1999 meeting or exceeding Medicare 2000-2009 2010-2018 certification requirements. Home The Sentinel Event Policy is established. ⎻ The Joint Commission launches its website at www.jcaho.org (now ⎻ www.jointcommission.org). 21 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1997 1910-1919 1920-1929 The Joint Commission launches 1950-1959 ® 1960-1969 ORYX : The Next Evolution in 1970-1979 ⎻ Accreditation™. 1980-1989 1990-1999 ® Quality Check becomes available 2000-2009 on the Joint Commission website. 2010-2018 ⎻ Home 22 © 2018 The Joint Commission. All Rights Reserved. 1998 1910-1919 The Sentinel Event Policy is revised
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]
  • Appendix I: Methodology and Origin of External Quality Review (Eqr) Protocol Development
    2012 EXTERNAL QUALITY REVIEW (EQR) PROTOCOLS APPENDIX I: METHODOLOGY AND ORIGIN OF EXTERNAL QUALITY REVIEW (EQR) PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS PURPOSE OF THE APPENDIX .......................................................................................................................................... 1 PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT PROTOCOLS DEVELOPMENT .............................................................. 2 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT PROTOCOLS DEVELOPMENT ............................................................. 6 INFORMATION SYSTEM CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT DEVELOPMENT ................................................ 7 ADDITIONAL REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................. 9 PURPOSE OF THE APPENDIX The purpose of this Appendix is to describe how the protocols were developed and to document the references applied to them. As described in the introduction to the protocols, the original protocols were developed in 2001 by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations (JCAHO), working with consultants and representatives of private accrediting organizations, quality measurement experts, State Medicaid agencies, and advocates for Medicaid beneficiaries, under the direction of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). In 2010, CMS contracted with Provider Resources, Inc. (PRI) and their subcontractor, the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA), to work with EQR stakeholders, including States,
    [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]