-
The British Journal of General Practice... May 2011
Topics: Accreditation; Attitude of Health Personnel; Clinical Competence; General Practice; Humans
PubMed: 21619760
DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X572319 -
The British Journal of General Practice... Apr 2011
Topics: Accreditation; Clinical Competence; General Practice; Humans
PubMed: 21439197
DOI: 10.3399/bjgp11X567270 -
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory... Apr 2016Accreditation is a valuable resource for medical laboratories. The development of quality systems based on ISO 15189 has taken place in many laboratories in the European... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Accreditation is a valuable resource for medical laboratories. The development of quality systems based on ISO 15189 has taken place in many laboratories in the European countries but data about accreditation remain scarce. The EFLM Working Group "Accreditation and ISO/CEN standards" conducted a survey that reviews the current state of the accreditation process in European countries.
METHODS
An on-line questionnaire was addressed to delegates of 39 EFLM scientific societies in March 2014. One answer by country was taken into account. The survey was dealing with mandatory status, number of accredited medical laboratories in each country, possibility of flexible scope and concerned medical fields. The status of point-of-care testing (POCT) in each country was also studied.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine responses (74%) were registered. All the assessed countries (100%) have begun an accreditation process in various ways. All the national accreditation bodies (NAB) offer or are working to offer an ISO 15189 accreditation. The accreditation process most often concerns all phases of the examination and various medical fields. Medical laboratories are responsible for POCT in 20 (69%) countries. The accreditation process for POCT, according to ISO 15189 and ISO 22870, is also developing.
CONCLUSIONS
While there are several variations in the approaches to accreditation of medical laboratories in the European countries, the ISO 15189 accreditation project has been widely accepted. The use of a unique standard and the cooperation among countries due to scientific societies, EFLM, accreditation bodies and EA enable laboratory professionals to move toward uniform implementation of the accreditation concept.
Topics: Accreditation; Europe; Humans; Medical Laboratory Science; Point-of-Care Testing; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 26744251
DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2015-0780 -
The Journal of the American Osteopathic... Apr 2017In July 2014, the American Osteopathic Association House of Delegates endorsed the establishment of a new, single graduate medical education accreditation system in... (Review)
Review
In July 2014, the American Osteopathic Association House of Delegates endorsed the establishment of a new, single graduate medical education accreditation system in collaboration with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine. Since that time, the osteopathic medical community has made substantial headway in the transition to the new system. This article provides an update on the transition.
Topics: Accreditation; Clinical Competence; Education, Medical, Graduate; Female; Forecasting; Humans; Male; Osteopathic Medicine; Societies, Medical; United States
PubMed: 28346601
DOI: 10.7556/jaoa.2017.038 -
Home Health Care Services Quarterly 2023While home health agencies (HHAs) can seek accreditation to recognize their quality of service, it is unknown whether agencies with accreditation perform better in...
While home health agencies (HHAs) can seek accreditation to recognize their quality of service, it is unknown whether agencies with accreditation perform better in providing care than those without accreditation. Using 5-year data from national data sources, the aims of this study were: 1) to depict characteristics of HHAs with and without accreditation; and 2) to examine the relationship between accreditation status and HHA performance on quality-of-care metrics. This study analyzed 7,697 agencies in the US and found that 1) agencies that were for-profit, urban, not-hospital-affiliated, single-branch, Medicare enrolled only, and without hospice program were more likely to have accreditation; and 2) overall, accredited agencies performed better on the three commonly used quality indicators, timely initiation of care, hospitalization, and emergency department visit, though not all the observed differences were substantial in absolute value. Our results provide unique empirical information to agencies considering seeking accreditation.
Topics: Aged; Humans; United States; Medicare; Cohort Studies; Home Care Agencies; Accreditation; Hospices; Quality of Health Care
PubMed: 36117455
DOI: 10.1080/01621424.2022.2123756 -
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory... Sep 2018- This review examines challenges and opportunities in preparing laboratories in a startup phase for accreditation by both the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
- This review examines challenges and opportunities in preparing laboratories in a startup phase for accreditation by both the College of American Pathologists (CAP) and International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15189 in an international setting as it relates to our experience at Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi Laboratory. It also discusses some of the strategies used in executing those projects and the added advantages in pursuing both types of accreditations.
OBJECTIVES
- To share our experience with CAP and ISO 15189 accreditations in a startup international operation in relation to the challenges encountered and implementation strategy success factors.
DATA SOURCES
- MEDLINE (PubMed) database was used to review this topic as well as peer-reviewed articles and World Health Organization publications on the topic.
CONCLUSIONS
- Accreditation is a perfect means toward building quality medical laboratories in a diverse workforce environment and improving patient safety. Further, it establishes a strong foundation on which any new operation can build a sustainable quality improvement culture. Accreditations by CAP and/or ISO are among the most reputable and well-established accreditation systems that clinical laboratories could aim for. As a result of both accreditations offering synergistic and complementing features, we recommend that any laboratory seeking excellence in quality and performance should consider exploring both. Key elements to success include having dedicated project management and change management support while preparing for accreditation. Laboratories seeking accreditation in early operational stages may face a number of challenges; however, significant opportunities will also be present to optimize various operational components from the beginning.
Topics: Accreditation; Clinical Laboratory Services; Humans; Pathology, Clinical; United Arab Emirates
PubMed: 28857610
DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2016-0567-RA -
The Surgeon : Journal of the Royal... Dec 2004Accreditation is an internationally recognised process through which healthcare organisations are able to improve the safety and quality of services delivered to... (Review)
Review
Accreditation is an internationally recognised process through which healthcare organisations are able to improve the safety and quality of services delivered to patients. The focus of accreditation is to help organisations understand what they are doing well and what opportunities are available for improvement. The Canadian approach to accreditation is a rigorous peer review process comprised of a self-assessment against a set of standards, an on-site survey and follow-up action on recommendations that arise from the survey. The accreditation standards can be used effectively to guide the surgical teams in the transformation of the specialty. The 17 standards that are used to evaluate surgical teams relate to the activities that represent the continuum of clinical care as well as aspects related to learning. Within the subsections and standards are opportunities for surgeons and surgical teams to use the standards to effectively deliver services and to continuously improve patient care. In 38 recent Canadian Accreditation AIM surveys, that included at least one surgical team, there were a total of 75 recommendations made to the teams. Most recommendations related to process as opposed to outcome issues, implying that surgeons need to become more proactive in the functioning of the surgical team and to participate more effectively in management issues related to surgical care. Attention to these details will position surgical programmes to effectively deal with the rapid pace of change that is inherent in a modern surgical practice.
Topics: Accreditation; Canada; General Surgery; Hospitals; Humans; Peer Review, Health Care
PubMed: 15712571
DOI: 10.1016/s1479-666x(04)80030-1 -
Journal of Women's Health (2002) May 2015This commentary responds to the assertions by Foreman et al. that credentialing of women's health (WH) fellows by the American Board of Medical Subspecialties and... (Review)
Review
This commentary responds to the assertions by Foreman et al. that credentialing of women's health (WH) fellows by the American Board of Medical Subspecialties and accreditation of current and future WH fellowships by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education would improve the health and healthcare of women by increasing the number of primary care providers competent to meet a growing clinical need. They speculate that such accreditation would raise the status of WH fellowships, increase the number of applicants, and result in more academic leaders in WH. They assert that curricular deficiencies in WH exist in physician training and that WH fellowships are the preferred means of training physicians to care for midlife women. We review the evidence to support or refute these claims and conclude that accrediting WH fellowships would not have the forecasted outcomes and would jeopardize the success of current WH fellowships.
Topics: Accreditation; Clinical Competence; Education, Medical, Graduate; Fellowships and Scholarships; Female; Humans; Societies, Medical; Women's Health
PubMed: 25919589
DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2015.5289 -
Archives of Pathology & Laboratory... Oct 2019The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) established a new system for accreditation of residency and fellowship programs in 2013. One key aspect... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT.—
The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) established a new system for accreditation of residency and fellowship programs in 2013. One key aspect of the Next Accreditation System is the 10-year self-study, which requires programs to conduct a comprehensive self-evaluation, including development of program aims and analysis of strengths, weaknesses, and environmental context, in order to plan improvements and take the program to the next level.
OBJECTIVE.—
To provide a review of the recent changes and current state of ACGME accreditation, with a focus on the new 10-year self-study, and to share our institution's experience with conducting the first self-study of our pathology residency and accredited fellowship programs in 2018.
DATA SOURCES.—
Review of English-language literature, published resources from the ACGME, and materials/data from our department's 2018 self-study.
CONCLUSIONS.—
The self-study process now required for ACGME accreditation is a useful way to assess program strengths and weaknesses in the context of current environmental and institutional factors, and helps develop an effective framework for improvements geared at achieving program aims and taking the program to the next level. Additionally, conducting residency and fellowship self-studies together allows for collaboration, effective use of shared resources, and the development of a cohesive educational mission.
Topics: Accreditation; Education, Medical, Graduate; Fellowships and Scholarships; Humans; Internship and Residency; Pathology
PubMed: 31017451
DOI: 10.5858/arpa.2018-0467-RA -
Family Medicine Feb 2023In 2020 the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) became the sole accrediting body for osteopathic and allopathic residency programs, with an...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
In 2020 the Accreditation Council on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) became the sole accrediting body for osteopathic and allopathic residency programs, with an option for programs to apply for Osteopathic Recognition (OR) to distinguish their training in osteopathic principles and practice. There is limited research regarding this transition. The goal of our study was to assess the perceived value of OR and perceived difficulty of obtaining OR for family medicine residency programs.
METHODS
We performed analyses regarding the difficulty of obtaining OR status and the value of OR and Osteopathic Principles and Practice (OPP) using questions on the 2020 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance (CERA) omnibus survey.
RESULTS
Of the 280 program directors (PD) responding, 69 (24.6%) had OR status, 126 (45.0%) were considering applying or would apply if needed resources were available, and 85 (30.4%) were not considering OR. Of the 73 PDs reporting on experience with the OR process, 28 (38.4%) found it "very smooth," 30 (41.1%) found it "a little bumpy," and 15 (20.5%) found it "very bumpy"; 87.0% of PDs (60 of 69) with OR felt it had value in recruiting DO students and 31.8% (22/69) in recruiting MD students; 86.9% of programs with OR status perceived OPP to be somewhat or very valuable in enhancing patient satisfaction compared to 77% of those considering OR and 44.7% not considering OR.
CONCLUSIONS
Program directors perceive value in OR status for recruiting and in osteopathic practice for patient care. Since 75.4% of responding program directors have or are interested in achieving OR status, further research is needed on its benefits and barriers.
Topics: Humans; United States; Osteopathic Medicine; Osteopathic Physicians; Internship and Residency; Education, Medical, Graduate; Surveys and Questionnaires; Accreditation
PubMed: 36787518
DOI: 10.22454/FamMed.2023.853908