ArticleIndian journal of ophthalmology2021
Impact of accreditation on documentation and staff perception in the ophthalmology department of an Indian medical college.
Article in Indian journal of ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Evaluating quality improvement in tertiary care hospital before and after NABH accreditation: a systematic review.Frontiers in health services · 2025Pooled it
- Implementing a quality improvement initiative for private healthcare facilities to achieve accreditation: experience from India.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Strategies to Reduce the Cost of Medical Education in India: A Narrative Review.Avicenna journal of medicine · 2022Review
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
Purpose: National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers operates the health-care accreditation program in India. Research on impact of accreditation on eye-care centers is scarce. This article was conceptualized to scientifically evaluate the changes in documentation brought about by accreditation and its effects on staff in the Ophthalmology Department of an Indian Medical College. Methods: This was conducted as a quasi-experimental study in four steps. First, a point-based evaluation of case sheets in both pre-accreditation and postaccreditation phase, along with statistical analysis of the results, was done. Step two involved analysis of quality indicators and patient safety indices in successive years from inception of data to post-accreditation phase. Step three comprised a survey of staff employing a validated tool, and finally, face-to-face semistructured interviews with designated authorities, including finance departmental head, completed the study. Results: A statistically significant difference was seen in scores achieved by the pre and postaccreditation case sheets, with the postphase case sheets achieving 15% increased scores over the prephase case sheets. Quality indicator indices displayed improvements post-accreditation. There was an accompanying increase in quantity of documentation. Financial data analysis showed increased expenditure for accreditation under multiple heads. Staff believed that accreditation led to increased workload but did not express decreased satisfaction and felt that accreditation was eventually beneficial. However, staff believed rewards for improving quality can be enhanced. Conclusion: Accreditation increases quality and quantity of documentation, and staff workload. Increased financial costs also ensue.Staff believe that accreditation improves quality, is beneficial, but desire enhanced rewards.
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.