Understanding the impact of accreditation on quality in healthcare: A grounded theory approach
To explore how organizations respond to and interact with the accreditation process and the actual and potential mechanisms through which accreditation may influence quality. Qualitative grounded theory study. Organizations who had participated in Accreditation Canada's Qmentum program during J...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | International journal for quality in health care 2017-11, Vol.29 (7), p.941-947 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 947 |
---|---|
container_issue | 7 |
container_start_page | 941 |
container_title | International journal for quality in health care |
container_volume | 29 |
creator | DESVEAUX, L. MITCHELL, J.I. SHAW, J. IVERS, N.M. |
description | To explore how organizations respond to and interact with the accreditation process and the actual and potential mechanisms through which accreditation may influence quality.
Qualitative grounded theory study.
Organizations who had participated in Accreditation Canada's Qmentum program during January 2014-June 2016.
Individuals who had coordinated the accreditation process or were involved in managing or promoting quality.
The accreditation process is largely viewed as a quality assurance process, which often feeds in to quality improvement activities if the feedback aligns with organizational priorities. Three key stages are required for accreditation to impact quality: coherence, organizational buy-in and organizational action. These stages map to constructs outlined in Normalization Process Theory. Coherence is established when an organization and its staff perceive that accreditation aligns with the organization's beliefs, context and model of service delivery. Organizational buy-in is established when there is both a conceptual champion and an operational champion, and is influenced by both internal and external contextual factors. Quality improvement action occurs when organizations take purposeful action in response to observations, feedback or self-reflection resulting from the accreditation process.
The accreditation process has the potential to influence quality through a series of three mechanisms: coherence, organizational buy-in and collective quality improvement action. Internal and external contextual factors, including individual characteristics, influence an organization's experience of accreditation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1093/intqhc/mzx136 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1953295046</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48516877</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>48516877</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c354t-4dd5d91911a7864d975ffd7673e576b6358274f1a5c746381cfaddd9d083aea83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kMtLAzEQh4MotlaPHpUcvaxNmtfmqMUXFLzY8zJNsm7KPtokC9a_3pWtwsAMzDc_hg-ha0ruKdFs7tu0r8y8-f6iTJ6gKeWSZ0wqdTrMTLCMCyIm6CLGLSFUMiHP0WShCRdS8il6XLfWhZigtb79xKly2Dc7MAl3JQZjgrM-QfJdi4fa91D7dMC-xZWDOlUGgrtEZyXU0V0d-wytn58-lq_Z6v3lbfmwygwTPGXcWmE11ZSCyiW3WomytEoq5oSSm-GzfKF4SUEYxSXLqSnBWqstyRk4yNkM3Y25u9DtexdT0fhoXF1D67o-FlQLttCCDMczlI2oCV2MwZXFLvgGwqGgpPjVVozailHbwN8eo_tN4-w__edpAG5GYBtTF_73PBdU5kqxH4radJw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1953295046</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Understanding the impact of accreditation on quality in healthcare: A grounded theory approach</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Oxford Journals Open Access Collection</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>DESVEAUX, L. ; MITCHELL, J.I. ; SHAW, J. ; IVERS, N.M.</creator><creatorcontrib>DESVEAUX, L. ; MITCHELL, J.I. ; SHAW, J. ; IVERS, N.M.</creatorcontrib><description>To explore how organizations respond to and interact with the accreditation process and the actual and potential mechanisms through which accreditation may influence quality.
Qualitative grounded theory study.
Organizations who had participated in Accreditation Canada's Qmentum program during January 2014-June 2016.
Individuals who had coordinated the accreditation process or were involved in managing or promoting quality.
The accreditation process is largely viewed as a quality assurance process, which often feeds in to quality improvement activities if the feedback aligns with organizational priorities. Three key stages are required for accreditation to impact quality: coherence, organizational buy-in and organizational action. These stages map to constructs outlined in Normalization Process Theory. Coherence is established when an organization and its staff perceive that accreditation aligns with the organization's beliefs, context and model of service delivery. Organizational buy-in is established when there is both a conceptual champion and an operational champion, and is influenced by both internal and external contextual factors. Quality improvement action occurs when organizations take purposeful action in response to observations, feedback or self-reflection resulting from the accreditation process.
The accreditation process has the potential to influence quality through a series of three mechanisms: coherence, organizational buy-in and collective quality improvement action. Internal and external contextual factors, including individual characteristics, influence an organization's experience of accreditation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1353-4505</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-3677</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzx136</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29045664</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Accreditation ; Delivery of Health Care - standards ; Grounded Theory ; Humans ; Ontario ; Qualitative Research ; Quality Assurance, Health Care - organization & administration</subject><ispartof>International journal for quality in health care, 2017-11, Vol.29 (7), p.941-947</ispartof><rights>The Author 2017</rights><rights>The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c354t-4dd5d91911a7864d975ffd7673e576b6358274f1a5c746381cfaddd9d083aea83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c354t-4dd5d91911a7864d975ffd7673e576b6358274f1a5c746381cfaddd9d083aea83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/48516877$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/48516877$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,800,27905,27906,57998,58231</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29045664$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>DESVEAUX, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MITCHELL, J.I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHAW, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>IVERS, N.M.</creatorcontrib><title>Understanding the impact of accreditation on quality in healthcare: A grounded theory approach</title><title>International journal for quality in health care</title><addtitle>Int J Qual Health Care</addtitle><description>To explore how organizations respond to and interact with the accreditation process and the actual and potential mechanisms through which accreditation may influence quality.
Qualitative grounded theory study.
Organizations who had participated in Accreditation Canada's Qmentum program during January 2014-June 2016.
Individuals who had coordinated the accreditation process or were involved in managing or promoting quality.
The accreditation process is largely viewed as a quality assurance process, which often feeds in to quality improvement activities if the feedback aligns with organizational priorities. Three key stages are required for accreditation to impact quality: coherence, organizational buy-in and organizational action. These stages map to constructs outlined in Normalization Process Theory. Coherence is established when an organization and its staff perceive that accreditation aligns with the organization's beliefs, context and model of service delivery. Organizational buy-in is established when there is both a conceptual champion and an operational champion, and is influenced by both internal and external contextual factors. Quality improvement action occurs when organizations take purposeful action in response to observations, feedback or self-reflection resulting from the accreditation process.
The accreditation process has the potential to influence quality through a series of three mechanisms: coherence, organizational buy-in and collective quality improvement action. Internal and external contextual factors, including individual characteristics, influence an organization's experience of accreditation.</description><subject>Accreditation</subject><subject>Delivery of Health Care - standards</subject><subject>Grounded Theory</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Ontario</subject><subject>Qualitative Research</subject><subject>Quality Assurance, Health Care - organization & administration</subject><issn>1353-4505</issn><issn>1464-3677</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kMtLAzEQh4MotlaPHpUcvaxNmtfmqMUXFLzY8zJNsm7KPtokC9a_3pWtwsAMzDc_hg-ha0ruKdFs7tu0r8y8-f6iTJ6gKeWSZ0wqdTrMTLCMCyIm6CLGLSFUMiHP0WShCRdS8il6XLfWhZigtb79xKly2Dc7MAl3JQZjgrM-QfJdi4fa91D7dMC-xZWDOlUGgrtEZyXU0V0d-wytn58-lq_Z6v3lbfmwygwTPGXcWmE11ZSCyiW3WomytEoq5oSSm-GzfKF4SUEYxSXLqSnBWqstyRk4yNkM3Y25u9DtexdT0fhoXF1D67o-FlQLttCCDMczlI2oCV2MwZXFLvgGwqGgpPjVVozailHbwN8eo_tN4-w__edpAG5GYBtTF_73PBdU5kqxH4radJw</recordid><startdate>20171101</startdate><enddate>20171101</enddate><creator>DESVEAUX, L.</creator><creator>MITCHELL, J.I.</creator><creator>SHAW, J.</creator><creator>IVERS, N.M.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20171101</creationdate><title>Understanding the impact of accreditation on quality in healthcare</title><author>DESVEAUX, L. ; MITCHELL, J.I. ; SHAW, J. ; IVERS, N.M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c354t-4dd5d91911a7864d975ffd7673e576b6358274f1a5c746381cfaddd9d083aea83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Accreditation</topic><topic>Delivery of Health Care - standards</topic><topic>Grounded Theory</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Ontario</topic><topic>Qualitative Research</topic><topic>Quality Assurance, Health Care - organization & administration</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>DESVEAUX, L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MITCHELL, J.I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHAW, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>IVERS, N.M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal for quality in health care</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>DESVEAUX, L.</au><au>MITCHELL, J.I.</au><au>SHAW, J.</au><au>IVERS, N.M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Understanding the impact of accreditation on quality in healthcare: A grounded theory approach</atitle><jtitle>International journal for quality in health care</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Qual Health Care</addtitle><date>2017-11-01</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>941</spage><epage>947</epage><pages>941-947</pages><issn>1353-4505</issn><eissn>1464-3677</eissn><abstract>To explore how organizations respond to and interact with the accreditation process and the actual and potential mechanisms through which accreditation may influence quality.
Qualitative grounded theory study.
Organizations who had participated in Accreditation Canada's Qmentum program during January 2014-June 2016.
Individuals who had coordinated the accreditation process or were involved in managing or promoting quality.
The accreditation process is largely viewed as a quality assurance process, which often feeds in to quality improvement activities if the feedback aligns with organizational priorities. Three key stages are required for accreditation to impact quality: coherence, organizational buy-in and organizational action. These stages map to constructs outlined in Normalization Process Theory. Coherence is established when an organization and its staff perceive that accreditation aligns with the organization's beliefs, context and model of service delivery. Organizational buy-in is established when there is both a conceptual champion and an operational champion, and is influenced by both internal and external contextual factors. Quality improvement action occurs when organizations take purposeful action in response to observations, feedback or self-reflection resulting from the accreditation process.
The accreditation process has the potential to influence quality through a series of three mechanisms: coherence, organizational buy-in and collective quality improvement action. Internal and external contextual factors, including individual characteristics, influence an organization's experience of accreditation.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>29045664</pmid><doi>10.1093/intqhc/mzx136</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1353-4505 |
ispartof | International journal for quality in health care, 2017-11, Vol.29 (7), p.941-947 |
issn | 1353-4505 1464-3677 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1953295046 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Jstor Complete Legacy; Oxford Journals Open Access Collection; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Accreditation Delivery of Health Care - standards Grounded Theory Humans Ontario Qualitative Research Quality Assurance, Health Care - organization & administration |
title | Understanding the impact of accreditation on quality in healthcare: A grounded theory approach |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T10%3A30%3A44IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Understanding%20the%20impact%20of%20accreditation%20on%20quality%20in%20healthcare:%20A%20grounded%20theory%20approach&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20for%20quality%20in%20health%20care&rft.au=DESVEAUX,%20L.&rft.date=2017-11-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=941&rft.epage=947&rft.pages=941-947&rft.issn=1353-4505&rft.eissn=1464-3677&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/intqhc/mzx136&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E48516877%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1953295046&rft_id=info:pmid/29045664&rft_jstor_id=48516877&rfr_iscdi=true |