Mumford Virginia, Greenfield David, Hogden Anne, Debono Deborah, Forde Kevin, Westbrook Johanna, Braithwaite Jeffrey
Centre for Clinical Governance Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, UNSW, Sydney, Australia.
School of Public Health and Community Medicine, UNSW, Sydney, Australia.
BMC Res Notes. 2015 Aug 20;8:363. doi: 10.1186/s13104-015-1330-6.
Hospital accreditation programs are internationally widespread and consume increasingly scarce health resources. However, we lack tools to consistently identify suitable indicators to assess and monitor accreditation outcomes. We describe the development and validation of such a tool.
Using Australian accreditation standards as our reference point we: reviewed the research evidence for potential indicators; looked for links with existing external indicators; and assessed relevant state and federal policies. We allocated provisional scores, on a five point Likert scale, to the five accountability criteria in the tool: research; accuracy; proximity; no adverse effects; and specificity. An expert panel validated the use of the purpose designed indicator assessment tool. The panel identified hand hygiene compliance rates as a suitable process indicator, and hospital acquired Staphylococcus aureus infection (SAB) rates as an outcome indicator, with the hypothesis that improved hand hygiene compliance rates and lower SAB rates would correlate with accreditation performance.
This new tool can be used to identify, analyse, and compare accreditation indicators. Using infection control indicators such as hand hygiene compliance and SAB rates to measure accreditation effectiveness has merit, and their efficacy can be determined by comparing accreditation scores with indicator outcomes. To verify the tool as a robust instrument, testing is needed in other health service domains, both in Australia and internationally. This tool provides health policy makers with an important means for assessing the accreditation programs which form a critical part of the national patient safety and quality framework.
医院评审项目在国际上广泛存在,且消耗着日益稀缺的卫生资源。然而,我们缺乏能够持续识别合适指标以评估和监测评审结果的工具。我们描述了这样一种工具的开发与验证过程。
以澳大利亚评审标准为参考点,我们:审查了潜在指标的研究证据;寻找与现有外部指标的联系;并评估了相关的州和联邦政策。我们按照李克特五点量表为该工具中的五个问责标准分配了临时分数:研究;准确性;接近度;无不良影响;以及特异性。一个专家小组对专门设计的指标评估工具的使用进行了验证。该小组确定手卫生依从率为合适的过程指标,医院获得性金黄色葡萄球菌感染(SAB)率为结果指标,并假设提高手卫生依从率和降低SAB率将与评审表现相关。
这种新工具可用于识别、分析和比较评审指标。使用诸如手卫生依从性和SAB率等感染控制指标来衡量评审效果具有价值,并且它们的有效性可以通过将评审分数与指标结果进行比较来确定。为了验证该工具作为一种可靠工具的有效性,需要在澳大利亚和国际的其他卫生服务领域进行测试。该工具为卫生政策制定者提供了一种重要手段,用于评估作为国家患者安全和质量框架关键部分的评审项目。