[Quality of health information in Mexico in the OECD context: 2017-2021]. / Calidad de la información en salud de México en el contexto de la OCDE: 2017-2021.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the health information system (HIS) of Mexico according to the information reported to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The ultimate goal is to identify the improvements that should be considered. METHOD: Health indicators published by the OECD (2017 to 2021) are analyzed according to 11 thematic groups. Coverage (quantity and type of indicators reported by thematic group) and quality of information were assessed, according to OECD guidelines. RESULTS: Mexico reported annually 14 of 378 indicators (3.7%), and discontinuously 204. In no group were all indicators reported annually, except for the two on COVID-19. Three out of 88 were reported annually on use of services; and none on health status, quality of care and pharmaceutical market. Twelve indicators (5.5% of those reported by Mexico, 3.2% of the full OECD set) had optimal quality and annual reporting. 57.7% of the reported indicators had at least one quality defect. CONCLUSIONS: Within the framework of the standards set by the OECD, of which Mexico is a member, the Mexican HIS presents significant deficits in coverage and quality of information. These results should be considered to implement improvement initiatives.

Calidad de la información en salud de México en el contexto de la OCDE: 2017-2021 / Quality of health information in Mexico in the OECD context: 2017-2021

Objetivo Evaluar el sistema de información en salud (SIS) de México según la información reportada a la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos (OCDE). El fin último es evidenciar las mejoras que se deberían considerar. Método Se analizan indicadores sobre salud publicados por la OCDE (2017 a 2021) según 11 grupos temáticos. Se valoraron cobertura (cantidad y tipo de indicadores reportados por grupo temático) y calidad de la información, según lineamientos de la OCDE. Resultados México reportó anualmente 14 de 378 indicadores (3,7%) y de forma discontinua 204. En ningún grupo se reportaron anualmente todos los indicadores, excepto los dos sobre COVID-19. Se reportan anualmente tres de 88 sobre utilización de servicios y ninguno sobre estado de salud, calidad de la atención y mercado farmacéutico. Con calidad óptima y reporte anual fueron 12 indicadores (5,5% de los reportados por México, 3,2% del set completo OCDE). El 57,7% de los indicadores reportados tuvieron al menos un defecto de calidad. Conclusiones En el marco de los estándares marcados por la OCDE, de la cual México es miembro, el SIS mexicano presenta déficits importantes de cobertura y de calidad de la información. Estos resultados deberían considerarse para implementar iniciativas de mejora. (AU)

Objective To evaluate the health information system (HIS) of Mexico according to the information reported to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The ultimate goal is to identify the improvements that should be considered. Method Health indicators published by the OECD (2017 to 2021) are analyzed according to 11 thematic groups. Coverage (quantity and type of indicators reported by thematic group) and quality of information were assessed, according to OECD guidelines. Results Mexico reported annually 14 of 378 indicators (3.7%), and discontinuously 204. In no group were all indicators reported annually, except for the two on COVID-19. Three out of 88 were reported annually on use of services; and none on health status, quality of care and pharmaceutical market. Twelve indicators (5.5% of those reported by Mexico, 3.2% of the full OECD set) had optimal quality and annual reporting. 57.7% of the reported indicators had at least one quality defect. Conclusions Within the framework of the standards set by the OECD, of which Mexico is a member, the Mexican HIS presents significant deficits in coverage and quality of information. These results should be considered to implement improvement initiatives. (AU)

[Comparative analysis of the accreditation of medical facilities in Canada, Chile, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia, Denmark, and MexicoAnálise comparativa da acreditação de estabelecimentos de saúde no Canadá, Chile, Comunidade Autônoma da Andaluzia, Dinamarca e México]. / Análisis comparativo de la acreditación de unidades médicas en Canadá, Chile, la Comunidad Autónoma de Andalucía, Dinamarca y México.

Objective: To compare and contrast the characteristics of the accreditation process for health care facilities in Canada, Chile, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (Spain), Denmark, and Mexico, in order to identify shared characteristics, differences, and lessons learned that may be useful for other countries and regions. Methods: An observational, analytical, retrospective study using open-access secondary sources on the accreditation and certification of health care facilities in 2019-2021 in these countries and regions. The general characteristics of the accreditation processes are described and comments are made on key aspects of the design of these programs. Additionally, analytical categories were created for degree of implementation and level of complexity, and the positive and negative results reported are summarized. Results: The operational components of the accreditation processes are country-specific, although they share similarities. The Canadian program is the only one that involves some form of responsive evaluation. There is a wide range in the percentage of establishments accredited from country to country (from 1% in Mexico to 34.7% in Denmark). Notable lessons learned include the complexity of application in a mixed public-private system (Chile), the risk of excessive bureaucratization (Denmark), and the need for clear incentives (Mexico). Conclusions: The accreditation programs operate in a unique way in each country and region, achieve varying degrees of implementation, and have an assortment of problems, from which lessons can be learned. Elements that hinder their implementation should be considered and adjustments made for the health systems of each country and region.

Objetivo: Comparar as características do processo de acreditação de estabelecimentos de saúde no Canadá, Chile, Comunidade Autônoma da Andaluzia, Dinamarca e México, a fim de identificar elementos comuns e diferenças, bem como lições aprendidas que podem ser úteis para outros países e regiões. Métodos: Estudo observacional, analítico e retrospectivo usando fontes secundárias de livre acesso sobre acreditação e certificação de estabelecimentos de saúde durante o período 2019-2021 nos países e regiões supracitados. As características gerais do processo de acreditação e suas respostas a pontos-chave no delineamento de tais programas foram descritas. Além disso, foram geradas categorias de análise para o andamento de sua implantação e seu grau de complexidade, e os desfechos favoráveis e desfavoráveis relatados foram resumidos. Resultados: Os componentes operacionais do processo de acreditação são peculiares a cada país, embora compartilhem certas semelhanças. O programa canadense é o único que contempla algum tipo de avaliação responsiva. Houve grande variação entre países no percentual de estabelecimentos acreditados (de 1% no México a 34,7% na Dinamarca). Entre as lições aprendidas, destacam-se a complexidade da aplicação do sistema misto público-privado (Chile), o risco de burocratização excessiva (Dinamarca) e a necessidade de incentivos claros (México). Conclusões: Os programas de acreditação operam de forma peculiar em cada país ou região, têm diferentes escopos e também apresentam diversos problemas a partir dos quais podemos aprender. É preciso considerar os elementos que dificultam a implementação e realizar as adequações necessárias para os sistemas de saúde de cada país ou região.

Análisis comparativo de la acreditación de unidades médicas en Canadá, Chile, la Comunidad Autónoma de Andalucía, Dinamarca y México

[RESUMEN]. Objetivo. Contrastar las características del proceso de acreditación de establecimientos de salud en Canadá, Chile, la Comunidad Autónoma de Andalucía, Dinamarca y México, con el fin de identificar elementos comunes y diferencias, y las lecciones aprendidas que puedan ser de utilidad para otros países y regiones. Métodos. Estudio observacional, analítico y retrospectivo en el que se usaron fuentes secundarias de libre acceso sobre acreditación y certificación de establecimientos de salud durante el período 2019-2021 en estos países y regiones. Se describen las características generales del proceso de acreditación y sus res- puestas a puntos clave del diseño de estos programas. Además, se generaron categorías de análisis para el avance en su implementación y su nivel de complejidad, y se resumen los resultados favorables y desfavorables informados. Resultados. Los componentes operativos del proceso de acreditación son peculiares de cada país, aunque comparten similitudes. El programa de Canadá es el único que contempla algún tipo de evaluación responsiva. Hay una amplia variación en la cobertura de establecimientos acreditados entre países (desde 1% en México a 34,7% en Dinamarca). Entre las lecciones aprendidas, se destacan la complejidad de aplicación del sistema mixto público-privado (Chile), el riesgo de una excesiva burocratización (Dinamarca) y la necesidad de incentivos claros (México). Conclusiones. Los programas de acreditación operan de forma peculiar en cada país o región, logran alcances diferentes y presentan problemáticas también diversas, de las que podemos aprender. Es necesario considerar los elementos que obstaculizan la implementación y generar adecuaciones para los sistemas de salud en cada país o región.

[ABSTRACT]. Objective. To compare and contrast the characteristics of the accreditation process for health care facilities in Canada, Chile, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (Spain), Denmark, and Mexico, in order to identify shared characteristics, differences, and lessons learned that may be useful for other countries and regions. Methods. An observational, analytical, retrospective study using open-access secondary sources on the accreditation and certification of health care facilities in 2019–2021 in these countries and regions. The general characteristics of the accreditation processes are described and comments are made on key aspects of the design of these programs. Additionally, analytical categories were created for degree of implementation and level of complexity, and the positive and negative results reported are summarized. Results. The operational components of the accreditation processes are country-specific, although they share similarities. The Canadian program is the only one that involves some form of responsive evaluation. There is a wide range in the percentage of establishments accredited from country to country (from 1% in Mexico to 34.7% in Denmark). Notable lessons learned include the complexity of application in a mixed public-private system (Chile), the risk of excessive bureaucratization (Denmark), and the need for clear incentives (Mexico). Conclusions. The accreditation programs operate in a unique way in each country and region, achieve varying degrees of implementation, and have an assortment of problems, from which lessons can be learned. Elements that hinder their implementation should be considered and adjustments made for the health systems of each country and region.

[RESUMO]. Objetivo. Comparar as características do processo de acreditação de estabelecimentos de saúde no Canadá, Chile, Comunidade Autônoma da Andaluzia, Dinamarca e México, a fim de identificar elementos comuns e diferenças, bem como lições aprendidas que podem ser úteis para outros países e regiões. Métodos. Estudo observacional, analítico e retrospectivo usando fontes secundárias de livre acesso sobre acreditação e certificação de estabelecimentos de saúde durante o período 2019-2021 nos países e regiões supracitados. As características gerais do processo de acreditação e suas respostas a pontos-chave no delineamento de tais programas foram descritas. Além disso, foram geradas categorias de análise para o andamento de sua implantação e seu grau de complexidade, e os desfechos favoráveis e desfavoráveis relatados foram resumidos. Resultados. Os componentes operacionais do processo de acreditação são peculiares a cada país, embora compartilhem certas semelhanças. O programa canadense é o único que contempla algum tipo de avaliação responsiva. Houve grande variação entre países no percentual de estabelecimentos acreditados (de 1% no México a 34,7% na Dinamarca). Entre as lições aprendidas, destacam-se a complexidade da aplicação do sistema misto público-privado (Chile), o risco de burocratização excessiva (Dinamarca) e a necessidade de incentivos claros (México). Conclusões. Os programas de acreditação operam de forma peculiar em cada país ou região, têm diferentes escopos e também apresentam diversos problemas a partir dos quais podemos aprender. É preciso conside- rar os elementos que dificultam a implementação e realizar as adequações necessárias para os sistemas de saúde de cada país ou região.

Análisis comparativo de la acreditación de unidades médicas en Canadá, Chile, la Comunidad Autónoma de Andalucía, Dinamarca y México / Comparative analysis of the accreditation of medical facilities in Canada, Chile, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia, Denmark, and Mexico / Análise comparativa da acreditação de estabelecimentos de saúde no Canadá, Chile, Comunidade Autônoma da Andaluzia, Dinamarca e México

RESUMEN Objetivo. Contrastar las características del proceso de acreditación de establecimientos de salud en Canadá, Chile, la Comunidad Autónoma de Andalucía, Dinamarca y México, con el fin de identificar elementos comunes y diferencias, y las lecciones aprendidas que puedan ser de utilidad para otros países y regiones. Métodos. Estudio observacional, analítico y retrospectivo en el que se usaron fuentes secundarias de libre acceso sobre acreditación y certificación de establecimientos de salud durante el período 2019-2021 en estos países y regiones. Se describen las características generales del proceso de acreditación y sus respuestas a puntos clave del diseño de estos programas. Además, se generaron categorías de análisis para el avance en su implementación y su nivel de complejidad, y se resumen los resultados favorables y desfavorables informados. Resultados. Los componentes operativos del proceso de acreditación son peculiares de cada país, aunque comparten similitudes. El programa de Canadá es el único que contempla algún tipo de evaluación responsiva. Hay una amplia variación en la cobertura de establecimientos acreditados entre países (desde 1% en México a 34,7% en Dinamarca). Entre las lecciones aprendidas, se destacan la complejidad de aplicación del sistema mixto público-privado (Chile), el riesgo de una excesiva burocratización (Dinamarca) y la necesidad de incentivos claros (México). Conclusiones. Los programas de acreditación operan de forma peculiar en cada país o región, logran alcances diferentes y presentan problemáticas también diversas, de las que podemos aprender. Es necesario considerar los elementos que obstaculizan la implementación y generar adecuaciones para los sistemas de salud en cada país o región.

ABSTRACT Objective. To compare and contrast the characteristics of the accreditation process for health care facilities in Canada, Chile, the Autonomous Community of Andalusia (Spain), Denmark, and Mexico, in order to identify shared characteristics, differences, and lessons learned that may be useful for other countries and regions. Methods. An observational, analytical, retrospective study using open-access secondary sources on the accreditation and certification of health care facilities in 2019-2021 in these countries and regions. The general characteristics of the accreditation processes are described and comments are made on key aspects of the design of these programs. Additionally, analytical categories were created for degree of implementation and level of complexity, and the positive and negative results reported are summarized. Results. The operational components of the accreditation processes are country-specific, although they share similarities. The Canadian program is the only one that involves some form of responsive evaluation. There is a wide range in the percentage of establishments accredited from country to country (from 1% in Mexico to 34.7% in Denmark). Notable lessons learned include the complexity of application in a mixed public-private system (Chile), the risk of excessive bureaucratization (Denmark), and the need for clear incentives (Mexico). Conclusions. The accreditation programs operate in a unique way in each country and region, achieve varying degrees of implementation, and have an assortment of problems, from which lessons can be learned. Elements that hinder their implementation should be considered and adjustments made for the health systems of each country and region.

RESUMO Objetivo. Comparar as características do processo de acreditação de estabelecimentos de saúde no Canadá, Chile, Comunidade Autônoma da Andaluzia, Dinamarca e México, a fim de identificar elementos comuns e diferenças, bem como lições aprendidas que podem ser úteis para outros países e regiões. Métodos. Estudo observacional, analítico e retrospectivo usando fontes secundárias de livre acesso sobre acreditação e certificação de estabelecimentos de saúde durante o período 2019-2021 nos países e regiões supracitados. As características gerais do processo de acreditação e suas respostas a pontos-chave no delineamento de tais programas foram descritas. Além disso, foram geradas categorias de análise para o andamento de sua implantação e seu grau de complexidade, e os desfechos favoráveis e desfavoráveis relatados foram resumidos. Resultados. Os componentes operacionais do processo de acreditação são peculiares a cada país, embora compartilhem certas semelhanças. O programa canadense é o único que contempla algum tipo de avaliação responsiva. Houve grande variação entre países no percentual de estabelecimentos acreditados (de 1% no México a 34,7% na Dinamarca). Entre as lições aprendidas, destacam-se a complexidade da aplicação do sistema misto público-privado (Chile), o risco de burocratização excessiva (Dinamarca) e a necessidade de incentivos claros (México). Conclusões. Os programas de acreditação operam de forma peculiar em cada país ou região, têm diferentes escopos e também apresentam diversos problemas a partir dos quais podemos aprender. É preciso considerar os elementos que dificultam a implementação e realizar as adequações necessárias para os sistemas de saúde de cada país ou região.

Acreditación de servicios y calidad de la atención a neonatos en hospitales mexicanos.

OBJETIVO: Comparar la calidad de atención a neonatos con sepsis neonatal, hipoxia intrauterina, prematuridad y asfixia perinatal en hospitales acreditados (HA) y no acreditados (HNA). Material y métodos. Se evaluaron 28 hospi-tales de la Secretaría de Salud en 11 estados de México; la evaluación incluyó infraestructura, equipamiento e insumos, procesos de gestión de calidad e indicadores de calidad clínica. Se utilizó LQAS y se estimó el cumplimiento promedio de criterios e indicadores en HA y HNA. RESULTADOS: Hubo diferencias significativas en favor de HA en equipamiento e insumos y no significativas en existencia y funcionamiento de los comités hospitalarios. No hubo diferencias consistentes ni significativas en cumplimiento de indicadores clínicos entre los HA y HNA. CONCLUSIONES: La acreditación para la atención de neonatos con los diagnósticos seleccionados no se asocia a diferencias en la calidad de la atención.

Acreditación de servicios y calidad de la atención a neonatos en hospitales mexicanos / Accreditation of services and quality of care for newborns in mexican hospitals

Resumen: Objetivo: Comparar la calidad de atención a neonatos con sepsis neonatal, hipoxia intrauterina, prematuridad y asfixia perinatal en hospitales acreditados (HA) y no acreditados (HNA). Material y métodos: Se evaluaron 28 hospitales de la Secretaría de Salud en 11 estados de México; la evaluación incluyó infraestructura, equipamiento e insumos, procesos de gestión de calidad e indicadores de calidad clínica. Se utilizó LQAS y se estimó el cumplimiento promedio de criterios e indicadores en HA y HNA. Resultados: Hubo diferencias significativas en favor de HA en equipamiento e insumos y no significativas en existencia y funcionamiento de los comités hospitalarios. No hubo diferencias consistentes ni significativas en cumplimiento de indicadores clínicos entre los HA y HNA. Conclusiones: La acreditación para la atención de neonatos con los diagnósticos seleccionados no se asocia a diferencias en la calidad de la atención.

Abstract: Objective: To compare the quality of care for neonates with neonatal sepsis, intrauterine hypoxia, prematurity and perinatal asphyxia in accredited hospitals (HA) and unaccredited (HNA). Materials and methods: 28 hospitals of the Ministry of Health were evaluated in 11 states in Mexico; the evaluation included infrastructure, equipment and supplies, quality management processes, and clinical quality indicators. LQAS was used, and average fulfillment of criteria and indicators in AH and NAH was estimated. Results: There were significant differences in favor of HA in equipment and supplies and, not significant, in the existence and functioning of hospital committees. There were no consistent or significant differences in compliance with clinical indicators between the AH y NAH. Conclusions: Accreditation for the care of newborns with the selected diagnoses is not associated with differences in the quality of care.

Barreras y facilitadores en la implementación de guías de práctica clínica en México: perspectiva del personal de salud / Barriers and facilitators in the implementation of clinical practice guidelines in Mexico: perspective of health workers

Resumen: Objetivo: Identificar barreras, facilitadores y propuestas de mejora en la implementación de Guías de Práctica Clínica (GPC) desde la perspectiva de los profesionales de la salud. Material y métodos: Estudio cualitativo a través de 85 entrevistas semiestructuradas a responsables de implementación, difusión y aplicación, y del personal operativo en centros de atención primaria y hospitales en siete estados de México. El contenido fue codificado y analizado con ATLAS.ti 7.0. Resultados: Las principales barreras encontradas fueron la no actualización de las GPC y baja alineación con otras normas, e imposibilidad de implementarlas debido a la sobrecarga de trabajo y los recursos limitados. Conclusiones: El esfuerzo por implementar GPC parece haber sido errático e insuficiente, y la evaluación de su utilización inexistente. Se propone crear estrategias integradas y contextualizadas que resulten ser más efectivas y eficientes para la implementación exitosa de GPC.

Abstract: Objective: To identify barriers, facilitators and proposals for improvement in the implementation of CPG from the perspective of health professionals. Materials and methods: Qualitative study through 85 semi-structured interviews with those responsible for the implementation, dissemination and application activities, and of the operational personnel in primary care centers and hospitals in seven states of Mexico. The content was coded and analyzed with ATLAS.ti 7.0. Results: The main barriers found were the failure to update the CPGs and low alignment with other standards, and the impossibility of implementing them due to work overload and limited resources. Conclusions: The effort to implement CPG seems to have been erratic and insufficient, and the evaluation of its use non-existent. It is proposed to create integrated and contextualized strategies that prove to be more effective and efficient for the successful implementation of the CPG.

Barreras y facilitadores en la implementación de guías de práctica clínica en México: perspectiva del personal de salud.

Objetivo. Identificar barreras, facilitadores y propuestas de mejora en la implementación de Guías de Práctica Clínica (GPC) desde la perspectiva de los profesionales de la salud. Material y métodos. Estudio cualitativo a través de 85 entrevistas semiestructuradas a responsables de implementa-ción, difusión y aplicación, y del personal operativo en centros de atención primaria y hospitales en siete estados de México. El contenido fue codificado y analizado con ATLAS.ti 7.0. Resultados. Las principales barreras encontradas fueron la no actualización de las GPC y baja alineación con otras normas, e imposibilidad de implementarlas debido a la sobre-carga de trabajo y los recursos limitados. Conclusiones. El esfuerzo por implementar GPC parece haber sido errático e insuficiente, y la evaluación de su utilización inexistente. Se propone crear estrategias integradas y contextualizadas que resulten ser más efectivas y eficientes para la implementación exitosa de GPC.

[Approach to the quality of care during pregnancy,delivery and postpartum in women withobstetric risk factors in Mexico]. / Aproximación a la calidad de la atención durante el embarazo, parto y posparto en mujeres con factores de riesgoobstétrico en México.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of care of women with obstetric risk factors during pregnancy, childbirth, and post-partum. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We use data from The National Survey of Health and Nutrition 2018-19. Women were classified by the presence of obstetric risk factors (ORF) in their last pregnancy. The quality of care provided to women was evaluated with indicators of structure and process dur-ing antenatal care (ANC) and, delivery and postpartum care (DPC). RESULTS: Compliance with process indicators in ANC and DPC for women with ORF was 56.9%. In the face of complications during pregnancy or delivery, it decreased in ANC, and in the face of social vulnerability compliance of ANC and DPC indicators decreases. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to systematically improve the quality of care during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum, regardless the presence of ORF, with special attention to vulnerable groups.

OBJETIVO: Evaluar la calidad de la atención a mujeres con factores de riesgo obstétrico durante el embarazo, parto y posparto. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Con datos de la Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición 2018-19, se clasificó a las mu-jeres de acuerdo con los factores de riesgo obstétrico (FRO) presentes en su último embarazo y se evaluó la calidad de la atención con indicadores de estructura y proceso en la atención prenatal (APN), y en la atención del parto y posparto (APP). RESULTADOS: El cumplimiento de indicadores de pro-ceso en APN y APP para mujeres con FRO fue de 56.9%. Ante complicaciones durante el embarazo o el parto, disminuyó en la APN, y ante variables socioeconómicas desfavorables, disminuyó en la APN y en la APP. CONCLUSIONES: Es nece-sario mejorar sistemáticamente la calidad de la atención en el embarazo, parto y posparto en mujeres con y sin riesgo obstétrico, principalmente en grupos vulnerables.

Aproximación a la calidad de la atención durante el embarazo, parto y posparto en mujeres con factores de riesgo obstétrico en México / Approach to the quality of care during pregnancy, delivery and postpartum in women with obstetric risk factors in Mexico

Resumen: Objetivo: Evaluar la calidad de la atención a mujeres con factores de riesgo obstétrico durante el embarazo, parto y posparto. Material y métodos. Con datos de la Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición 2018-19, se clasificó a las mujeres de acuerdo con los factores de riesgo obstétrico (FRO) presentes en su último embarazo y se evaluó la calidad de la atención con indicadores de estructura y proceso en la atención prenatal (APN), y en la atención del parto y posparto (APP). Resultados: El cumplimiento de indicadores de proceso en APN y APP para mujeres con FRO fue de 56.9%. Ante complicaciones durante el embarazo o el parto, disminuyó en la APN, y ante variables socioeconómicas desfavorables, disminuyó en la APN y en la APP. Conclusiones: Es necesario mejorar sistemáticamente la calidad de la atención en el embarazo, parto y posparto en mujeres con y sin riesgo obstétrico, principalmente en grupos vulnerables.

Abstract: Objective: To assess the quality of care of women with obstetric risk factors during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum. Materials and methods: We use data from The National Survey of Health and Nutrition 2018-19. Women were classified by the presence of obstetric risk factors (ORF) in their last pregnancy. The quality of care provided to women was evaluated with indicators of structure and process during antenatal care (ANC) and, delivery and postpartum care (DPC). Results: Compliance with process indicators in ANC and DPC for women with ORF was 56.9%. In the face of complications during pregnancy or delivery, it decreased in ANC, and in the face of social vulnerability compliance of ANC and DPC indicators decreases. Conclusions: It is necessary to systematically improve the quality of care during pregnancy, childbirth, and postpartum, regardless the presence of ORF, with special attention to vulnerable groups.

Certificación de establecimientos de atención médica en México: análisis de los incentivos para su continuidad / Certification of medical care facilities in Mexico: analysis of the incentives for its continuity

Resumen: Objetivo: Analizar el posible efecto de los modelos de certificación y de los incentivos implementados en la participación de establecimientos de atención médica (EAM) en la certificación del Consejo de Salubridad General entre 1999-2017. Material y métodos: Se colectaron documentos oficiales, impresos y en línea, sobre la certificación de EAM y se solicitó información a diversas instancias relacionadas mediante mecanismos de transparencia. Se analizó la participación de EAM en los períodos político-administrativos entre 1999-2017. Resultados: El promedio anual de participación entre 1999-2000 fue de 259.5 EAM; entre 2013-2016, de 72.5. La participación de EAM públicos es decreciente. En 2017, los EAM certificados eran <1%. Conclusiones: No se identificaron efectos positivos ni sostenidos de ajustes al modelo, ni de los incentivos implementados. Se observa disminución de la participación en los distintos periodos político-administrativos. Debe evaluarse profundamente el Sistema Nacional de Certificación de EAM y su posible efecto en la calidad clínica.

Abstract: Objective: To analyze the possible effect of certification models and healthcare organizations' (HOs) participation incentives in the General Health Council certification process in the 1999-2017 period. Materials and methods: Official printed and online documents about HOs' certification were collected. Information from instances related to the process was requested through transparency mechanisms. Health organizations' participation in political-administrative periods between 1997-2017 was analyzed. Results: The annual average participation in the certification process during the 1999-2000 period was 259.5 HOs; during the 2013-2016 period, the average was 72.5. Public units' participation in this process has been decreasing. In 2017, certified HO were <1%. Conclusions: No positive effects of adjustments to the certification model or the incentives applied were identified. Conversely, there is decreasing participation in the different political-administrative periods. The National HO Certification System and its possible effect on clinical quality must be thoroughly evaluated.

[Certification of medical care facilities in Mexico: analysis of the incentives for its continuity.] / Certificación de establecimientos de atención médica en México: análisis de los incentivos para su continuidad.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the possible effect of certification models and healthcare organizations' (HOs) participation incentives in the General Health Council certification process in the 1999-2017 period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Official printed and online documents about HOs' certification were collected. Information from instances related to the process was requested through transparency mechanisms. Health organizations' participation in political-administrative periods between 1997-2017 was analyzed. RESULTS: The annual average participation in the certification process during the 1999-2000 period was 259.5 HOs; during the 2013-2016 period, the average was 72.5. Public units' participation in this process has been decreasing. In 2017, certified HO were <1%. CONCLUSIONS: No positive effects of adjustments to the certification model or the incentives applied were identified. Conversely, there is decreasing participation in the different political-administrative periods. The National HO Certification System and its possible effect on clinical quality must be thoroughly evaluated.

OBJECTIVE: Analizar el posible efecto de los modelos de certificación y de los incentivos implementados en la participación de establecimientos de atención médica (EAM) en la certificación del Consejo de Salubridad General entre 1999-2017. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Se colectaron documentos oficiales, impresos y en línea, sobre la certificación de EAM y se solicitó información a diversas instancias relacionadas mediante mecanismos de transparencia. Se analizó la participación de EAM en los períodos político-administrativos entre 1999-2017. RESULTS: El promedio anual de participación entre 1999-2000 fue de 259.5 EAM; entre 2013-2016, de 72.5. La participación de EAM públicos es decreciente. En 2017, los EAM certificados eran <1%. CONCLUSIONS: No se identificaron efectos positivos ni sostenidos de ajustes al modelo, ni de los incentivos implementados. Se observa disminución de la participación en los distintos periodos político-administrativos. Debe evaluarse profundamente el Sistema Nacional de Certificación de EAM y su posible efecto en la calidad clínica.

[Results of certification audit in Mexican hospitals, a review from 2009 to 2012]. / Revisión de los resultados de la auditoría de certificación en hospitales mexicanos de 2009 a 2012.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the participation of Mexican hospitals in the certification process (equivalent to accreditation in other countries). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Crosssectional study that analyzes results of 136 establishments audited between 2009 and 2012. Standards with an excellent rating (9.0-10.0), approving (6-8.9) and non-approving (0-5.9) were identified. With a multinomial model, the probability of obtaining non-approving, approving and excellent qualification was calculated. RESULTS: The general average score was 7.72, higher in ambulatory surgery centers (9.10), than in general hospitals (7.30) and specialty hospitals (7.99). All public establishments obtained an approval score. Hospitals audited in 2011 had a higher risk of obtaining an approval (RRR= 4.6, p<0.05) and excellent (RRR= 6.6, p<0.05) rating. CONCLUSIONS: The scope of the certification process in Mexico has been limited, with greater participation of the private sector. The evaluation certificate applied in 2011 favored the achievement of approval and excellence results. We recommend homologating the entire process with that of the Joint Commission International JCI.

OBJETIVO: Analizar la participación de hospitales mexicano en el proceso de certificación (equivalente a la acreditación en otros países). MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio transversal, analiza resultados de 136 establecimientos auditados entre 2009 y 2012. Se identificaron estándares con calificación excelente (9.0-10.0), aprobatoria (6-8.9) y no aprobatoria (0-5.9). Con un modelo logístico multinomial se calculó la probabilidad de obtener calificación no aprobatoria, aprobatoria y excelente. RESULTADOS: La calificación promedio general fue 7.72, más alta en hospitales de cirugía ambulatoria (9.10), que en hospitales generales (7.30) y de especialidad (7.99). Todos los establecimientos públicos obtuvieron calificación aprobatoria. Los hospitales auditados en 2011 tuvieron mayor riesgo de obtener calificación aprobatoria (RRR= 4.6, p<0.05) y excelente (RRR= 6.6, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONES: El alcance del proceso de certificación en México ha sido limitado, con mayor participación del sector privado. La cé- dula de evaluación aplicada en 2011 favoreció la obtención de resultados aprobatorios y de excelencia. Se recomienda homologar el proceso en su totalidad con el empleado por la Joint Commission International (JCI).

Revisión de los resultados de la auditoría de certificación en hospitales mexicanos de 2009 a 2012 / Results of certification audit in Mexican hospitals, a review from 2009 to 2012

Resumen: Objetivo: Analizar la participación de hospitales mexicanos en el proceso de certificación (equivalente a la acreditación en otros países). Material y métodos: Estudio transversal, analiza resultados de 136 establecimientos auditados entre 2009 y 2012. Se identificaron estándares con calificación excelente (9.0-10.0), aprobatoria (6-8.9) y no aprobatoria (0-5.9). Con un modelo logístico multinomial se calculó la probabilidad de obtener calificación no aprobatoria, aprobatoria y excelente. Resultados: La calificación promedio general fue 7.72, más alta en hospitales de cirugía ambulatoria (9.10), que en hospitales generales (7.30) y de especialidad (7.99). Todos los establecimientos públicos obtuvieron calificación aprobatoria. Los hospitales auditados en 2011 tuvieron mayor riesgo de obtener calificación aprobatoria (RRR= 4.6, p<0.05) y excelente (RRR= 6.6, p<0.05). Conclusiones: El alcance del proceso de certificación en México ha sido limitado, con mayor participación del sector privado. La cédula de evaluación aplicada en 2011 favoreció la obtención de resultados aprobatorios y de excelencia. Se recomienda homologar el proceso en su totalidad con el empleado por la Joint Commission International (JCI).

Abstract: Objective: To analyze the participation of Mexican hospitals in the certification process (equivalent to accreditation in other countries). Materials and methods: Cross-sectional study that analyzes results of 136 establishments audited between 2009 and 2012. Standards with an excellent rating (9.0-10.0), approving (6-8.9) and non-approving (0-5.9) were identified. With a multinomial model, the probability of obtaining non-approving, approving and excellent qualification was calculated. Results: The general average score was 7.72, higher in ambulatory surgery centers (9.10), than in general hospitals (7.30) and specialty hospitals (7.99). All public establishments obtained an approval score. Hospitals audited in 2011 had a higher risk of obtaining an approval (RRR= 4.6, p<0.05) and excellent (RRR= 6.6, p<0.05) rating. Conclusions: The scope of the certification process in Mexico has been limited, with greater participation of the private sector. The evaluation certificate applied in 2011 favored the achievement of approval and excellence results. We recommend homologating the entire process with that of the Joint Commission International JCI.

[Implementation of quality of care indicators for third-level public hospitals in Mexico]. / Implementación de indicadores de calidad de la atención en hospitales públicos de tercer nivel en México.

OBJECTIVE:: To select, pilot test and implement a set of indicators for tertiary public hospitals. MATERIALS AND METHODS:: Quali-quantitative study in four stages: identification of indicators used internationally; selection and prioritization by utility, feasibility and reliability; exploration of the quality of sources of information in six hospitals; pilot feasibility and reliability, and follow-up measurement. RESULTS:: From 143 indicators, 64 were selected and eight were prioritized. The scan revealed sources of information deficient. In the pilot, three indicators were feasible with reliability limited. Has conducted workshops to improve records and sources of information; nine hospitals reported measurements of a quarter. CONCLUSIONS:: Eight priority indicators could not be measured immediately due to limitations in the data sources for its construction. It is necessary to improve mechanisms of registration and processing of data in this group of hospital.

Implementación de indicadores de calidad de la atención en hospitales públicos de tercer nivel en México / Implementation of quality of care indicators for third-level public hospitals in Mexico

Resumen: Objetivo: Seleccionar, pilotar e implementar un set de indicadores para hospitales públicos de tercer nivel. Material y métodos: Estudio cuali-cuantitativo en cuatro etapas: identificación de indicadores usados internacionalmente; selección y priorización por utilidad, factibilidad y confiabilidad; exploración de la calidad de fuentes de información en seis hospitales y piloto de factibilidad y fiabilidad, y medición de seguimiento. Resultados: De 143 indicadores, se seleccionaron 64 y priorizaron ocho. La exploración reveló fuentes de información deficientes. En el piloto, tres indicadores resultaron factibles con fiabilidad limitada. Se realizaron talleres para mejorar registros y fuentes de información; nueve hospitales reportaron mediciones de un trimestre. Conclusiones: No fue posible medir los ocho indicadores priorizados de forma inmediata debido a limitaciones en las fuentes de datos para su construcción. Es necesario mejorar mecanismos de registro y procesamiento de datos en este grupo de hospitales.

Abstract: Objective: To select, pilot test and implement a set of indicators for tertiary public hospitals. Materials and methods: Quali-quantitative study in four stages: identification of indicators used internationally; selection and prioritization by utility, feasibility and reliability; exploration of the quality of sources of information in six hospitals; pilot feasibility and reliability, and follow-up measurement. Results: From 143 indicators, 64 were selected and eight were prioritized. The scan revealed sources of information deficient. In the pilot, three indicators were feasible with reliability limited. Has conducted workshops to improve records and sources of information; nine hospitals reported measurements of a quarter. Conclusions: Eight priority indicators could not be measured immediately due to limitations in the data sources for its construction. It is necessary to improve mechanisms of registration and processing of data in this group of hospital.

Quality agencies at the global level: characteristics and functions-a narrative review.

PURPOSE: To provide a comparative description of the structure, function and activities of quality agencies around the world and describe the published evidence of their impact on the health system. DATA SOURCES: A narrative review was conducted using the information found on websites, articles, books and gray literature in English and Spanish. STUDY SELECTION: The search process included three complementary approaches: (i) websites of agencies, ministries of health and quality-related official institutions; (ii) evaluations, reports, audits or documents regarding quality agencies; and (iii) scientific articles and gray literature found (key word: quality agency) using Ebsco databases. Information was completed using the 'snowball' technique, tracking internet materials and citing literature of reviewed documents. DATA EXTRACTION: The analytical framework to summarize the information included the agencies' mission, structures, target institutions, activities (following a six-domain model), funding, information management and impact evaluations. RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS: Information was found regarding quality agencies in 62 countries. Those focusing mainly on accreditation were discarded for further analysis. Agencies with a broader focus, according to the six-domain model for quality improvement (QI) strategies, were found in nine countries. Information resulted very heterogeneous in form and substance. However, they share the function of strengthening and advising on 'public goods', through information, knowledge management and development of standards. No impact evaluations of any type were found. CONCLUSION: The characteristics of existing quality agencies are very heterogeneous, being accreditation the main common focus. There is a lack of both a comprehensive approach to QI strategies and a formal assessment of their impact or contribution for improving quality.

[Organizational capacity for continuous improvement of health services]. / Estrategia integral de formación para la mejora continua de la calidad de los servicios de salud.

While the Mexican health system has achieved significant progress, as reflected in the growing improvement in population health, heterogeneity in the quality of services and its impact on health in different population groups is still a challenge. The costs or poor quality represent about 20 to 40% of the health system's expenditure. We need to develop organizational capacity to implement quality management systems in order to identify, evaluate, prevent and eventually overcome the health system's challenges. A competency-based comprehensive strategy for training human resources is proposed including undergraduate and graduate education as well as continuing education, which will contribute to improve the quality function at the various levels of responsibility in the health system. The proposed strategy responds to the context of the Mexican health system, but it could be adapted to other systems and contexts.

Estrategia integral de formación para la mejora continua de la calidad de los servicios de salud / Organizational capacity for continuous improvement of health services

El sistema de salud mexicano ha tenido logros importantes que se reflejan en la mejora creciente del nivel de salud. Empero, la heterogeneidad en la calidad de los servicios y su repercusión en la salud de diferentes grupos poblacionales continúan siendo un reto. Los costos de fallos en la calidad representan de 20 a 40% del gasto de los sistemas de salud. Es necesario desarrollar la capacidad organizacional para implementar sistemas de gestión de calidad que permitan identificar, evaluar, superar y prevenir los retos del sistema de salud. Para ello, se propone una estrategia integral de formación de recursos humanos basada en competencias y responsabilidades, que incluye programas de pregrado, posgrado y educación continua para favorecer el ejercicio efectivo de la función de calidad en los diversos niveles de responsabilidad del sistema de salud. La estrategia responde a las necesidades del sistema mexicano, pero puede ser adaptada a diferentes sistemas y contextos.

While the Mexican health system has achieved significant progress, as reflected in the growing improvement in population health, heterogeneity in the quality of services and its impact on health in different population groups is still a challenge. The costs or poor quality represent about 20 to 40% of the health system's expenditure. We need to develop organizational capacity to implement quality management systems in order to identify, evaluate, prevent and eventually overcome the health system's challenges. A competency-based comprehensive strategy for training human resources is proposed including undergraduate and graduate education as well as continuing education, which will contribute to improve the quality function at the various levels of responsibility in the health system. The proposed strategy responds to the context of the Mexican health system, but it could be adapted to other systems and contexts.