SynthesisFrontiers in health services2025
Evaluating quality improvement in tertiary care hospital before and after NABH accreditation: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in health services, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Medication Safety in India and Southeast Asia: A SWOT Analysis of Policies and Practices.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Review
- Healthcare facility accreditation status and associated factors in Somalia: evidence from the 2022-2023 harmonized health facility assessment.BMC health services research · 2026Article
- Hospital Accreditation Governance in Afghanistan: Challenges and Solutions.Journal of healthcare leadership · 2026Article
- How hospital accreditation requirements bridge enablers for AI readiness: interpretative analysis of intersections in framework standards.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The National Accreditation Board for Hospitals and Healthcare Providers (NABH.) accreditation process aims to elevate the quality of healthcare services through an impartial, external peer evaluation of an organization's performance. This study compares NABH. quality indicators in a tertiary care hospital before and after accreditation, assessing changes in patient care, hospital management, and staff performance. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Literature was searched across PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library from August 2023 to January 2024. Keywords included "NABH. accreditation and hospital quality," "Accreditation in Indian hospitals and patient safety," and "Tertiary care hospital before and after accreditation." Boolean operators, synonyms, and related terms were used to ensure comprehensive retrieval. Independent reviewers screened studies, and risk of bias assessment was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Results: The study highlights significant improvements in hospital quality indicators following NABH accreditation. Hospital-acquired infection rates decreased, with infection control compliance improving by 40%. Operational efficiency improved with a 20% reduction in discharge delays and a 15% increase in documentation accuracy. Patient satisfaction scores rose by 25%, and structured policies enhanced service quality by 30%. Additionally, 85% of hospital staff reported higher job satisfaction. Statistical analysis confirmed significant differences in compliance rates ( Conclusion: NABH accreditation improves patient safety, lowers infection rates, and boosts overall productivity. The structured framework encourages continuous improvement, but institutional commitment and ongoing oversight are necessary for long-term sustainability.
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.