Accreditation in 2030.

With the rapid acceleration of changes being experienced throughout the world and in particular within health and health and social care, accreditation programmes must keep pace or go the way of the dinosaur. While accreditation has deep roots in some countries, in the past 30 years, it has spread to a considerably larger range of countries in a mix of mandatory and voluntary systems. Accreditation is a tool to improve the quality of healthcare and social care, and in particular, there is recent recognition of its value in low- and middle-income countries, with promotion by the World Health Organization (WHO). The challenge is that with the rapid pace of change, how does accreditation reframe and reposition itself to ensure relevance in 2030? Accreditation must adapt and be relevant in order to be sustainable. This article outlines the fundamental principles, reviews the global trends' impact on accreditation and the challenges with the existing model and, through the lens of living in 2030, outlines how accreditation programmes will be structured and applied 10 years from now.

Transformational improvement in quality care and health systems: the next decade.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare is amongst the most complex of human systems. Coordinating activities and integrating newer with older ways of treating patients while delivering high-quality, safe care, is challenging. Three landmark reports in 2018 led by (1) the Lancet Global Health Commission, (2) a coalition of the World Health Organization, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the World Bank, and (3) the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine of the United States propose that health systems need to tackle care quality, create less harm and provide universal health coverage in all nations, but especially low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this study is to review these reports with the aim of advancing the discussion beyond a conceptual diagnosis of quality gaps into identification of practical opportunities for transforming health systems by 2030. MAIN BODY: We analysed the reports via text-mining techniques and content analyses to derive their key themes and concepts. Initiatives to make progress include better measurement, using the capacities of information and communications technologies, taking a systems view of change, supporting systems to be constantly improving, creating learning health systems and undergirding progress with effective research and evaluation. Our analysis suggests that the world needs to move from 2018, the year of reports, to the 2020s, the decade of action. We propose three initiatives to support this move: first, developing a blueprint for change, modifiable to each country's circumstances, to give effect to the reports' recommendations; second, to make tangible steps to reduce inequities within and across health systems, including redistributing resources to areas of greatest need; and third, learning from what goes right to complement current efforts focused on reducing things going wrong. We provide examples of targeted funding which would have major benefits, reduce inequalities, promote universality and be better at learning from successes as well as failures. CONCLUSION: The reports contain many recommendations, but lack an integrated, implementable, 10-year action plan for the next decade to give effect to their aims to improve care to the most vulnerable, save lives by providing high-quality healthcare and shift to measuring and ensuring better systems- and patient-level outcomes. This article signals what needs to be done to achieve these aims.

The unrecognized power of health services accreditation: more than external evaluation.

While it is widely recognized that accreditation enables an organization to improve its performance and sustain a culture of quality, changing healthcare practices to align with evidence-informed guidelines (clinical and administrative) is a complex process that takes time. The true value of accreditation lies in its contribution to healthcare safety and quality as a means to prompt and support 'knowledge to action', a key value of accreditation that 'has yet to be articulated'. Using the 'knowledge to action' cycle, a planned action framework, we illustrate that accreditation is a knowledge translation (KT) or implementation intervention that seeks to improve and increase the uptake of evidence in healthcare organizations. The accreditation components, including the quality framework, standards, self-assessment process and on-site survey visit, ultimately serve to improve quality, decreasing variation in practice and strengthening a culture of quality. With a unique perspective and alignment obtained through the implementation lens, we examine the accreditation process and components relative to the 'knowledge to action cycle' with implications for enhancing the value of accreditation beyond current appreciation to both accreditation bodies worldwide and those organizations that participate in accreditation programs. Until organizations and accreditation bodies embrace the accreditation process as a knowledge to action intervention to bring about meaningful and sustained change, the full benefits of the process will not be optimized nor achieved.

Patient Safety: We've Come a Long Way.

Patient safety has come a long way since the release of the 1999 Institute of Medicine report To Err Is Human. This report revealed the immense size of the problem of preventable adverse events - events that in the past we assumed were "just complications" occurring in the normal course of diagnosis and treatment. Simultaneously, shining the light on patient safety "took the lid off quality." Those of us involved in healthcare provision always had a commitment to providing high-quality care, yet the focus of many key stakeholders on the importance of high-quality healthcare had been limited. The focus tended to be disproportionately on the rising cost of healthcare rather than a balanced focus on quality. Now, we respect the imperative of achieving high-quality healthcare.

Coping with more people with more illness. Part 2: new generation of standards for enabling healthcare system transformation and sustainability.

In Part 2 of this two-part contribution made on behalf of the Innovation and Systems Change Working Group of the International Society for Quality in Health Care (ISQua), we continue the argument for refashioning health systems in response to ageing and other pressures. Massive ageing in many countries and accompanying technological, fiscal and systems changes are causing the tectonic plates of healthcare to shift in ways not yet fully appreciated. In response, while things remain uncertain, we nevertheless have to find ways to proceed. We propose a strategy for stakeholders to pursue, of key importance and relevance to the ISQua: to harness flexible standards and external assessment in support of needed change. Depending on how they are used, healthcare standards and accreditation can promote, or hinder, the changes needed to create better healthcare for all in the future. Standards should support people's care needs across the life cycle, including prevention and health promotion. New standards that emphasise better coordination of care, those that address the entire healthcare journey and standards that reflect and predict technological changes and support new models of care can play a part. To take advantage of these opportunities, governance bodies, external assessment agencies and other authorities will need to be less prescriptive and better at developing more flexible standards that apply to the entire health journey, incorporating new definitions of excellence and acceptability. The ISQua welcomes playing a leadership role.

Coping with more people with more illness. Part 1: the nature of the challenge and the implications for safety and quality.

Health systems are under more pressure than ever before, and the challenges are multiplying and accelerating. Economic forces, new technology, genomics, AI in medicine, increasing demands for care-all are playing a part, or are predicted to increasingly do so. Above all, ageing populations in many parts of the world are exacerbating the disease burden on the system and intensifying the requirements to provide effective care equitably to citizens. In this first of two companion articles on behalf of the Innovation and Systems Change Working Group of the International Society for Quality in Health Care (ISQua), in consultation with representatives from over 40 countries, we assess this situation and discuss the implications for safety and quality. Health systems will need to run ahead of the coming changes and learn how to cope better with more people with more chronic and acute illnesses needing care. This will require collective ingenuity, and a deep desire to reconfigure healthcare and re-engineer services. Chief amongst the successful strategies, we argue, will be preventative approaches targeting both physical and psychological health, paying attention to the determinants of health, keeping people at home longer, experimenting with new governance and financial models, creating novel incentives, upskilling workforces to fit them for the future, redesigning care teams and transitioning from a system delivering episodic care to one that looks after people across the life cycle. There are opportunities for the international community to learn together to revitalise their health systems in a time of change and upheaval.

The future of health systems to 2030: a roadmap for global progress and sustainability.

Most research on health systems examines contemporary problems within one, or at most a few, countries. Breaking with this tradition, we present a series of case studies in a book written by key policymakers, scholars and experts, looking at health systems and their projected successes to 2030. Healthcare Systems: Future Predictions for Global Care includes chapters on 52 individual countries and five regions, covering a total of 152 countries. Synthesised, two key contributions are made in this compendium. First, five trends shaping the future healthcare landscape are analysed: sustainable health systems; the genomics revolution; emerging technologies; global demographics dynamics; and new models of care. Second, nine main themes arise from the chapters: integration of healthcare services; financing, economics and insurance; patient-based care and empowering the patient; universal healthcare; technology and information technology; aging populations; preventative care; accreditation, standards, and policy; and human development, education and training. These five trends and nine themes can be used as a blueprint for change. They can help strengthen the efforts of stakeholders interested in reform, ranging from international bodies such as the World Health Organization, the International Society for Quality in Health Care and the World Bank, through to national bodies such as health departments, quality and safety agencies, non-government organisations (NGO) and other groups with an interest in improving healthcare delivery systems. This compendium offers more than a glimpse into the future of healthcare-it provides a roadmap to help shape thinking about the next generation of caring systems, extrapolated over the next 15 years.

Leveraging the full value and impact of accreditation.

Providing high quality and safe patient care is a challenge in the current rapidly changing and complex health care environment. A variety of independent tools and methodologies contribute to this effort, e.g. regulatory requirements, quality improvement tools and accreditation methodologies. A concern is that each alone will not achieve the tipping point in health care quality that is required. This paper suggests that the methodology and application of accreditation have the potential to be the force to bring these approaches into alignment and ultimately measurably improve the quality of care.

Accomplishing reform: successful case studies drawn from the health systems of 60 countries.

Healthcare reform typically involves orchestrating a policy change, mediated through some form of operational, systems, financial, process or practice intervention. The aim is to improve the ways in which care is delivered to patients. In our book 'Health Systems Improvement Across the Globe: Success Stories from 60 Countries', we gathered case-study accomplishments from 60 countries. A unique feature of the collection is the diversity of included countries, from the wealthiest and most politically stable such as Japan, Qatar and Canada, to some of the poorest, most densely populated or politically challenged, including Afghanistan, Guinea and Nigeria. Despite constraints faced by health reformers everywhere, every country was able to share a story of accomplishment-defining how their case example was managed, what services were affected and ultimately how patients, staff, or the system overall, benefited. The reform themes ranged from those relating to policy, care coverage and governance; to quality, standards, accreditation and regulation; to the organization of care; to safety, workforce and resources; to technology and IT; through to practical ways in which stakeholders forged collaborations and partnerships to achieve mutual aims. Common factors linked to success included the 'acorn-to-oak tree' principle (a small scale initiative can lead to system-wide reforms); the 'data-to-information-to-intelligence' principle (the role of IT and data are becoming more critical for delivering efficient and appropriate care, but must be converted into useful intelligence); the 'many-hands' principle (concerted action between stakeholders is key); and the 'patient-as-the-pre-eminent-player' principle (placing patients at the centre of reform designs is critical for success).

Effectively leading for quality.

Although significant advances have occurred in medical and related sciences, the quality improvement and patient safety movements have been slow to gain traction. There are many "pockets" of progress around the globe; however, the scale and spread has been slow. Stimulating culture and system change in healthcare requires a definitive change in leadership style and approach. Health leaders of today must commit to the critical success factors and demonstrate the attributes necessary to create change and raise the bar for quality improvement and safety.

Preparing national health systems to cope with the impending tsunami of ageing and its associated complexities: Towards more sustainable health care.

Healthcare systems across the world are experiencing increased financial, organizational and social pressures attributable to a range of critical issues including the challenge of ageing populations. Health systems need to adapt, in order to sustainably provide quality care to the widest range of patients, particularly those with chronic and complex diseases, and especially those in vulnerable and low-income groups. We report on a workshop designed to tackle such issues under the auspices of ISQua, with representatives from Argentina, Australia, Canada, Columbia, Denmark, Emirates, France, Ireland, Jordan, Qatar, Malaysia, Norway, Oman, UK, South Africa and Switzerland. We discuss some of the challenges facing healthcare systems in countries ageing rapidly, to those less so, and touch on current and future reform options.

Interorganizational networks: fundamental to the Accreditation Canada program.

Within the Canadian healthcare system, the term population-accountable health network defines the use of collective resources to optimize the health of a population through integrated interventions. The leadership of these networks has also been identified as a critical factor, highlighting the need for creative management of resources in determining effective, balanced sets of interventions. In this article, using specific principles embedded in the Accreditation Canada program, the benefits of a network approach are highlighted, including knowledge sharing, improving the consistency of practice through standards, and a broader systems-and-population view of healthcare delivery across the continuum of care. The implications for Canadian health leaders to leverage the benefits of interorganizational networks are discussed.

Profiling health-care accreditation organizations: an international survey.

OBJECTIVE: To describe global patterns among health-care accreditation organizations (AOs) and to identify determinants of sustainability and opportunities for improvement. DESIGN: Web-based questionnaire survey. PARTICIPANTS: Organizations offering accreditation services nationally or internationally to health-care provider institutions or networks at primary, secondary or tertiary level in 2010. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: s) External relationships, scope and activity public information. RESULTS: Forty-four AOs submitted data, compared with 33 in a survey 10 years earlier. Of the 30 AOs that reported survey activity in 2000 and 2010, 16 are still active and stable or growing. New and old programmes are increasingly linked to public funding and regulation. CONCLUSIONS: While the number of health-care AOs continues to grow, many fail to thrive. Successful organizations tend to complement mechanisms of regulation, health-care funding or governmental commitment to quality and health-care improvement that offer a supportive environment. Principal challenges include unstable business (e.g. limited market, low uptake) and unstable politics. Many organizations make only limited information available to patients and the public about standards, procedures or results.

Comparison of health service accreditation programs in low- and middle-income countries with those in higher income countries: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: The study aim was twofold: to investigate and describe the organizational attributes of accreditation programmes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to determine how or to what extent these differ from those in higher-income countries (HICs) and to identify contextual factors that sustain or are barriers to their survival. DESIGN: Web-based questionnaire survey. PARTICIPANTS: National healthcare accreditation providers and those offering international services. In total, 44 accreditation agencies completed the survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Income distinctions, accreditation programme features, organizational attributes and cross-national divergence. RESULTS: Accreditation programmes of LMICs exhibit similar characteristics to those of HICs. The consistent model of accreditation worldwide, centres on promoting improvements, applying standards and providing feedback. Where they do differ, the divergence is over specialized features rather than the general logic. LMICs were less likely than HICs to include an evaluation component to programmes, more likely to have certification processes for trainee surveyors and more likely to make decisions on the accreditation status based on a formulaic, mathematically oriented approach. Accreditation programme sustainability, irrespective of country characteristics, is influenced by ongoing policy support from government, a sufficient large healthcare market size, stable programme funding, diverse incentives to encourage participation in accreditation by Health Care Organizations as well as the continual refinement and improvement in accreditation agency operations and programme delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the similarities, differences and factors that sustain accreditation programmes in LMICs, and HICs, can be applied to benefit programmes around the world. A flourishing accreditation programme is one element of the institutional basis for high-quality health care.

Activating knowledge for patient safety practices: a Canadian academic-policy partnership.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, the need for healthcare delivery systems to identify and address patient safety issues has been propelled to the forefront. A Canadian survey, for example, demonstrated patient safety to be a major concern of frontline nurses (Nicklin & McVeety 2002). Three crucial patient safety elements, current knowledge, resources, and context of care have been identified by the World Health Organization (WHO 2009). To develop strategies to respond to the scope and mandate of the WHO report within the Canadian context, a pan-Canadian academic-policy partnership has been established. APPROACH: This newly formed Pan-Canadian Partnership, the Queen's Joanna Briggs Collaboration for Patient Safety (referred throughout as "QJBC" or "the Partnership"), includes the Queen's University School of Nursing, Accreditation Canada, the Canadian Patient Safety Institute (CPSI), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and is supported by an active and committed advisory council representing over 10 national organizations representing all sectors of the health continuum, including patients/families advocacy groups, professional associations, and other bodies. This unique partnership is designed to provide timely, focused support from academia to the front line of patient safety. QJBC has adopted an "integrated knowledge translation" approach to identify and respond to patient safety priorities and to ensure active engagement with stakeholders in producing and using available knowledge. Synthesis of evidence and guideline adaptation methodologies are employed to access quantitative and qualitative evidence relevant to pertinent patient safety questions and subsequently, to respond to issues of feasibility, meaningfulness, appropriateness/acceptability, and effectiveness. SUMMARY: This paper describes the conceptual grounding of the Partnership, its proposed methods, and its plan for action. It is hoped that our journey may provide some guidance to others as they develop patient safety models within their own arenas.

The determinants of quality healthcare: implications for Canadian health leaders.

The Accreditation Canada program supports organizations in delivering quality healthcare using a quality framework that recognizes the complex interplay of multiple factors that define quality. This article highlights the Accreditation Canada quality framework and how these dimensions of quality together promote quality care. Using three dimensions of quality--population focus, safety, and worklife--we discuss how these quality dimensions can be utilized by healthcare leaders to improve quality in their organizations.

Alberta Health Services: journey to accreditation.

In October 2010, Alberta Health Services (AHS) successfully completed phase one of its journey to accreditation, meeting 683 of 774 criteria and earning Accreditation with Condition. AHS entered accreditation during its infancy (18 months, to be exact) in an environment shaped by seismic organizational and structural changes. In this article, the authors share some of the successes, challenges and ongoing opportunities that have emerged during the first years of AHS's accreditation journey, as well as details of the strong collaborative relationship between AHS and Accreditation Canada.

What's on the quality agenda? Acknowledging progress, respecting the challenges.

While many quality improvement and performance measurement initiatives are under way in Canada and beyond, there are challenges to be met around effectively coordinating the national quality agenda, sharing expertise and reducing duplication. An important first step has been recognizing the vital connection between quality and efficiency.While many provinces and territories have embraced the quality challenge, the national quality agenda remains less than coordinated. Reaching agreement on goals must be done in full collaboration with the provinces and territories, respecting their unique priorities while also providing the benefits of a national measurement and performance system and broader-level strategies.Workplace culture affects the ability to deliver safe care. Creating an integrated culture of quality results in measurable improvements in staff satisfaction and patient outcomes. However, this process requires long-term commitments from governments, boards, chief executive officers (CEOs) and staff, and involvement at all levels in design, initiation and implementation.There is frustration with the extensive and growing number of bodies to whom health organizations must submit data. This duplication could be reduced through consistent definitions, measurement priorities and reporting mechanisms, as well as national agreement on core performance measures. Ongoing collaboration at many levels is increasing the sharing of information and aligning of definitions in this regard.

The quality journey--in fast forward.

Healthcare providers have always focused on the quality of healthcare. However, the escalating focus of government on quality and the connection between quality and efficiency signals a significant positive change in the health quality journey. Given accreditation's contribution to quality and efficiency, quality discussions and initiatives inherently include accreditation in a renewed way.