evaluation of hospital accreditation in indonesia by the hospital ...

management, and mechanisms to monitor outcomes of service 16. According
to Utarini (2011) in Indonesia the development of quality management
systems and clinical governance runs parallel without meeting point 12.
Currently the trends in the quality development efforts is to focus the
attention to clinicians to develop and maintain service standards. This concept
looks at clinical governance initiative, which emphasized that any initiative in
the quality of health services in the future should be directly related to the
quality of services 12. In Australia, this is done by putting the clinical indicators
as part of accreditation. The accreditation standards consist of three
components, namely the assessment of 35 types of assessments, monitoring
of clinical indicators, as well as organization and management 3.
There was no difference in perception between hospital type A and B
to type C and D. In average, they agreed with the involvement of staff in the
accreditation process and agrees that the impact on the quality of hospital
accreditation. These results differ from those in Lebanon where there are
differences in perception between large hospitals with a small hospital. Smallmedium
hospital more able to feel the impact of accreditation, as compared
with large hospitals 7. It is interesting for further study because of large-scale
organizations (large hospitals) more appreciative and feel the benefits of
accreditation than a small hospital because they are not burdened with the
cost of accreditation surveys 14.
Type of Influence and Suggestions to Accreditation System
The majority of suggestions from the respondents were about
evaluation, that indirectly intended as a coaching process of accreditation.
The absence of KARS evaluation system is also found in previous studies 3.
This needs serious attention because the evaluation or review after the
accreditation process is essential to stimulate hospital to continuously
improvement efforts in the period between accreditation, which is usually 3
years, because if not, the organization will be off guard and the hospital can
no longer make internal improvements. Eventually the quality of the hospital
will decline 8. In addition, the accreditation program will be very effective when
the evaluation process is combined with consultation / mentoring / coaching to
help hospitals improve the quality of service 14.