A Mixed-Methods Study to Explore the Impact of Hospital Accreditation
Khamis Al-Alawy, Immanuel Azaad Moonesar, Hanan Obaid, Reem Gaafar, Ehab Ismail Al-Abed Bawadi
Abstract
There are several hospital accreditors globally but there is limited understanding of how accreditation impacts on hospital performance and the health system objectives. The objective of the study were to explore the impact of hospital accreditation and inform policy decision-making. We adopted a mixed-methods approach to include an online survey and 3 focus groups. We report 27 of 36 private hospitals who responded to the survey. Key reasons for accreditation were to improve quality ( n = 23), implement evidence-based practice ( n = 17), continuity of accreditation ( n = 15), and popularity ( n = 11). Reported improvements include quality of care (27), patient care (26), organizational processes (21), and patient satisfaction (19) among others. Average stakeholder satisfaction rate was 74%. Participants from the 3 focus group discussions felt that staff hours and stress levels were high during the accreditation process, and some standards were useful while others were deemed non-essential. There was support for a local accreditation body with an emphasis on best practice. The findings from the study suggest accreditation to have an impact on structure and process measures, but the gains in key areas were short-lived. There is a need to strengthen governance and develop performance measures to evidence outcome improvement, assure alignment with regulation and the health system objectives.