Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36047710›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2022

The attitudes of hospital directors towards normalising accreditation standards: A qualitative descriptive study for Saudi Arabia.

Mohammed Hussein, Milena Pavlova, Wim Groot

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The sustainability of hospital accreditation models: a cross-sectional study.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mohammed HusseinDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht 6200 MD, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-5170-2809
Milena PavlovaDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht 6200 MD, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6082-8446
Wim GrootDepartment of Health Services Research, CAPHRI, Maastricht University Medical Center, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht 6200 MD, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAccreditation is an important performance management tool. The engagement of stakeholders in pursuing accreditation plays a critical role in integrating standards into routine practice.

objectiveThis study explores the attitude of hospital directors towards accreditation and investigates the mechanisms of normalising standards in Saudi Arabian hospitals.

methodsFifteen hospital directors across Saudi Arabia participated in semi-structured qualitative interviews. The interviews were conducted virtually, audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and then analysed thematically using the NVivo-12 software package. The normalisation process theory (i.e. coherence, participation, actions and monitoring) was adopted to frame the study and describe the findings on normalising accreditation standards heuristically.

resultsOverall, the hospital directors perceived accreditation favourably, particularly by those with more experience or previous exposure to accreditation. This attitude was a factor in normalising standards into daily operations. The clarity of standards, availability of full-time quality professionals and alignment of accreditation standards with hospital strategies assisted hospital directors in making sense of accreditation (coherence) and moving towards engaging hospital teams in the process (cognitive participation). This motivation-driven engagement catalysed the initiation of purposeful operational activities to integrate standards in operations (collective actions). The integration included distributing standard sets to relevant owners, conducting gap analysis, constructing a corrective plan and prioritising tasks within timeframes. Despite the financial and structural constraints experienced, the integration resulted in enhanced organisational safety culture, team spirit, communication, public trust, reporting of safety concerns and standardising of procedures. Following the integration, the objective appraisal of accreditation benefits (reflexive monitoring) was critical in addressing what went wrong, what worked well, and subsequently in sustaining performance gains.

conclusionThe effectiveness of integrating accreditation standards heavily relies on making sense of accreditation and understanding the mechanisms through which standards are routinised into operations. This study, using normalisation process theory constructs, indicates that standards integration phases are sequential, interlinked and influenced by culture, teamwork and leadership engagement. The findings helped in clarifying the accreditation operating process which may provide advantages to policymakers and stakeholders in making informed decisions on the implementation of accreditation.

Indexed as

AccreditationHospitalsAttitude of Health PersonnelHumansQualitative ResearchSaudi Arabiaaccreditationattitudehealthcare qualityhospitalsnormalisation process theory

Identifiers

PMID36047710
PMCPMC9470101

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.