Observational studyBMC family practice2014
Effect of accreditation on the quality of chronic disease management: a comparative observational study.
Observational study in BMC family practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implementation strategies to increase smoking cessation treatment provision in primary care: a systematic review of observational studies.BMC primary care · 2023Pooled it
- Mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external assessment: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Nursing perception towards the impact of JCI accreditation on the quality of care in a university hospital in Palestine: a cross-sectional study.BMC nursing · 2024Article
- Accreditation of primary health care centres in the KSA: Lessons from developed and developing countries.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2023Article
- Impacts of accreditation on the performance of primary health care centres: A systematic review.Malaysian family physician : the official journal of the Academy of Family Physicians of Malaysia · 2023Article
- What GPs do to meet accreditation standards - implementation activities and perceived improvements attributed to general practice accreditation.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- What Gets Measured Gets Improved-Setting Standards and Accreditation for Quality Improvement for Diabetes Services in Australia.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2021Article
- Experiences of accreditation impact in general practice - a qualitative study among general practitioners and their staff.BMC family practice · 2019Article
- Understanding accreditation standards in general practice - a qualitative study.BMC family practice · 2019Article
- Quality indicators for pharmaceutical care: a comprehensive set with national scores for Dutch community pharmacies.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPractice accreditation is widely used to assess and improve quality of healthcare providers. Little is known about its effectiveness, particularly in primary care. In this study we examined the effect of accreditation on quality of care regarding diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and cardiovascular disease (CVD).
methodsA comparative observational study with two cohorts was performed. We included 138 Dutch family practices that participated in the national accreditation program for primary care. A first cohort of 69 practices was measured at start and completion of a 3-year accreditation program. A second cohort of 69 practices was included and measured simultaneously with the final measurement of the first cohort. In separate multilevel regression analyses, we compared both within-group changes in the first cohort and between-groups differences at follow-up (first cohort) and start (second cohort). Outcome measures consisted of 24 systematically developed indicators of quality of care in targeted chronic diseases.
resultsIn the within-group comparison, we found improvements on 6 indicators related to diabetes (feet examination, cholesterol measurement, lipid lowering medication prescription) and COPD (spirometry performance, stop smoking advice). In the between-groups comparison we found that first cohort practices performed better on 4 indicators related to diabetes (cholesterol outcome) and CVD (blood pressure outcome, smoke status registration, glucose measurement).
conclusionsImprovements of the quality of primary care for patients with chronic diseases were found, but few could be attributed to the accreditation program. Further development of accreditation is needed to enhance its effectiveness on chronic disease management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.