10.08.2013 Views

Vergelijkende studie van ... - KCE

Vergelijkende studie van ... - KCE

Vergelijkende studie van ... - KCE

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

6 Hospital Accreditation <strong>KCE</strong> reports 70<br />

Table 1 : Philosophy of Accreditation<br />

• Mandated Voluntary<br />

• Punitive Improvement oriented<br />

• Cyclical Continuous<br />

• Prescriptive Non-prescriptive<br />

• Confidential Publicly disclosed<br />

• Minimum requirements Cutting edge requirements<br />

• Reactive Proactive<br />

• Announced Unannounced<br />

• Retrospective Prospective<br />

• Standards based Performance measured based<br />

• Process oriented Outcomes oriented<br />

• Absolute measurement Comparative measurement<br />

• One-level award Multi-level award<br />

Source: Joint Commission International<br />

Another example is the classification used by the International Society for Quality in<br />

Health Care (ISQua), in their ‘Toolkit for Accreditation Programs’, as developed for the<br />

World Bank in 2004 4 . This classification groups the different variables that determine<br />

the potential effectiveness, affordability and sustainability in 4 main categories:<br />

Table 2 : Variable factors determining the potential effectiveness,<br />

affordability and sustainability of a programme<br />

Policy:<br />

• What is the purpose of the proposed program?<br />

• How might it complement or replace alternative mechanisms, such as licensing and certification?<br />

• How would it match the culture of the population and professions concerned?<br />

• What incentives would encourage participation?<br />

Organisation:<br />

• How would the people most likely to be affected (“stakeholders”) be identified and involved?<br />

• How would the program be governed?<br />

• How would it ensure compatibility with associated regulatory and independent agencies?<br />

Methods:<br />

• How will standards be made valid?<br />

• How will assessments be made reliable?<br />

• How will assessors be trained and re-validated?<br />

• How will procedures and results be made transparent and fair?<br />

Resources:<br />

• What are the implications for data, information and training?<br />

• What are the costs to participating institutions?<br />

• How long does it take to set up a sustainable program?<br />

• What does it cost to set it up?<br />

For the purpose of this report, a framework to analyse accreditation was developed in<br />

function of the 2 research questions defined (1, the Inventory and Comparative Analysis<br />

of Hospital Accreditation Programmes in Europe; 2, the Exploration of Accreditation<br />

Opportunities for Belgian Hospitals), of the literature search strategies applied and of<br />

the (International and national) surveys conducted. To some extent the proposed<br />

framework combines certain elements already applied in other reports as this will allow<br />

to point out trends and tendencies (see 5.1.3., 5.1.4. and 5.2.4).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!