ArticleBMJ open quality2022
Hospital accreditation processes in Saudi Arabia: a thematic analysis of hospital staff experiences.
Article in BMJ open quality, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Explaining the barriers and facilitators of the accreditation process in maternity departments.BMC nursing · 2025Article
- Perceptions of Chinese hospital leaders on joint commission international accreditation: a qualitative study.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospital accreditation by an international organisation can play an important role in health quality and safety. However, little is known about how managers and front-line employees experience and perceive the effects of accreditation. Their views could inform quality improvement processes and procedures.
objectiveTo explore perceptions of employees at the managerial level on the Joint Commission International (JCI) accreditation process and its impact on quality of patient care in Saudi Arabian JCI-accredited hospitals.
methodsWe undertook a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to explore the perspectives of senior staff from three accredited public hospitals in Saudi Arabia. Interviews were transcribed prior to thematic analysis.
resultsTwenty managers participated in the interviews. The following inter-related themes emerged concerning the JCI accreditation process and its impact on quality of patient care: drivers for the change; the plan for the change; the process of the change; maintaining changes post-accreditation and patients' issues. Participants were positive in their accounts of: drivers for the change; planning for the change needed to achieve accreditation and managing patients' issues. However, participants reported less favourably on: the process of the change; and maintaining changes post-accreditation.
conclusionThe planning stage was perceived as the easiest component of JCI accreditation. Implementing and maintaining changes post-accreditation that demonstrably promote patient safety and quality of care was perceived as more difficult. When planning for accreditation, institutions need to incorporate strategies to ensure that improvements to care continue beyond the accreditation period.
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.