ArticleBMC family practice2015
Determinants of impact of a practice accreditation program in primary care: a qualitative study.
Article in BMC family practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external assessment: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.BMJ open · 2020Pooled it
- Clinical Performance Feedback Intervention Theory (CP-FIT): a new theory for designing, implementing, and evaluating feedback in health care based on a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative research.Implementation science : IS · 2019Pooled it
- The Prerequisites of Executing the Accreditation Program for Primary Healthcare: A Systematic Review and Meta-Synthesis.Iranian journal of public health · 2024Review
- Accreditation of primary health care centres in the KSA: Lessons from developed and developing countries.Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences · 2023Article
- First Clinical Nutrition Outpatient Consultation: A Review of Basic Principles in Nutritional Care of Adults with Hematologic Disease.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2023Review
- What GPs do to meet accreditation standards - implementation activities and perceived improvements attributed to general practice accreditation.BMC primary care · 2022Article
- Article
- Repeat Auditing of Primary Health-care Facilities Against Standards for Occupational Health and Infection Control: A Study of Compliance and Reliability.Safety and health at work · 2020Article
- Which Factors Influence the Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Dutch Physiotherapy Practice? A Cross-Sectional Study.Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada · 2020Article
- 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
- Assessing the Presence of the Joint Commission International Accreditation Requirements in Western Saudi Arabia Hospital Pharmacies: A Cross-sectional Study.Journal of research in pharmacy practiceArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPractice accreditation is a widely used method to assess and improve the quality of healthcare services. In the Netherlands, a practice accreditation program was implemented in primary medical care. We aimed to identify determinants of impact of a practice accreditation program, building on the experiences of primary care professionals who had participated in this program.
methodsAn interview study was done to document the experiences of 33 participating primary care professionals and used to identify determinants of outcomes. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used as framework for the qualitative analysis.
resultsAfter analyzing 23 interviews saturation was reached. The practice accreditation program is based on structured quality improvement, but only some of its elements were identified as determinants of impact. Factors that were perceived to facilitate implementation of the program were: designating one person responsible for the program, ensuring clear lines of communication within the whole practice team and having affinity with or stimulate enthusiasm for improving quality of care. Contextual factors such as participation in a care group and being connected to the GP educational institute were important for actual change. The accreditation program was perceived to have positive effects on team climate and commitment to quality of care in the practice team. The perception was that patient care was not directly influenced by the accreditation program. Receiving a certificate for completing the accreditation program seemed to have little added value to participants.
conclusionsPractice accreditation may have positive outcomes on quality of care, but not all planned elements may contribute to its outcomes. Both factors in the accreditation process and in the context were perceived as determinants of quality improvement. The challenge is to build on facilitating factors, while reducing the elements of accreditation that do not contribute to its impact.
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.