Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39973157›Full record

ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2025

The sustainability of hospital accreditation models: a cross-sectional study.

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, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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, Limburg 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, Limburg 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, Limburg 6200 MD, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the importance of hospital accreditation, its sustainability is jeopardized. This is due to the disparity between the rapid changes in the health sector and the accreditation standards that remain unchanged. This study aims to examine what improvements are important in enhancing the sustainability of the hospital accreditation model in Saudi Arabia.

methodsAll quality managers in accredited Saudi Arabian hospitals were invited to participate in a cross-sectional questionnaire-based study in July-August 2022. A structured questionnaire was developed, tested, piloted, and factorially validated using exploratory factor analysis. On a 5-point Likert scale, respondents were asked to rate the importance of recommended changes that are proposed to enhance the sustainability of accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team. The importance of the recommendations, according to the respondents, was described using the relative importance index, while multivariate linear regression was used to analyse the association with independent variables.

resultsA total of 158 valid questionnaires (64% response rate) were included in the analysis. On average, participants had 6.9 (SD 2.1) years of experience in quality management. The overall mean importance attached to improving standards development, accreditation policies, evaluation team, and evaluation methods were 3.55, 3.43, 3.41, and 3.21, on a 5-point scale, respectively. Shifting the focus of accreditation standards from structure and compliance to outcomes and improvement (mean importance = 4.47), updating standards periodically to reflect current best practices and research (mean importance = 4.41), and integrating consumer perspectives in all aspects of accreditation (mean importance = 4.37) were the most important perceived recommendations. Multivariate regression analysis yielded that managers with more years of experience had significantly higher mean scores on the importance of improving accreditation policies (β = 0.120, P = .037), standards development (β = 0.246, P < .001), evaluation methods (β = 0.268, P < .001), and the evaluation team (β = 0.369, P < .001).

conclusionsImproving accreditation policies, standards development, evaluation methods, and the evaluation team are important in enhancing the sustainability of hospital accreditation programmes. This study offers insights to assist policymakers and other stakeholders in redesigning traditional accreditation models to make them more sustainable and that can supplement other performance improvement tools in improving the quality of healthcare services.

Indexed as

AccreditationHospitalsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleQuality ImprovementSaudi ArabiaSurveys and Questionnairesaccreditationexternal evaluationhealth policyhospitalquality improvementsustainability

Identifiers

PMID39973157
PMCPMC11908374

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.