Health services accreditation: What is the evidence that the benefits justify the costs?

Mumford, V; Forde, K; Greenfield, D; Hinchcliff, R; Braithwaite, J

Health services accreditation: What is the evidence that the benefits justify the costs?

Mumford, V Forde, K Greenfield, D Hinchcliff, R

Braithwaite, J

Permalink

Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 2013, 25 (5), pp. 606 - 620
Issue Date:: 2013-10-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	watermark (1).pdf	Published Version	225.61 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Mumford, V	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Forde, K	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Greenfield, D	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Hinchcliff, R https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9920-4211	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Braithwaite, J	en_US
dc.date.issued	2013-10-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 2013, 25 (5), pp. 606 - 620	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1353-4505	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/117323
dc.description.abstract	Purpose. To identify and analyse research on the use of economic evaluation in health services accreditation. Data sources. Seven online health and economic databases, and key accreditation agency and health department websites were searched between June and December 2011. Study selection. The selection criteria were English language and published empirical research studies on the topic of economic evaluation of health service accreditation. No formal economic evaluation of health services accreditation has been carried out to date. Empirical data on costs and benefits were analysed in 6 and 15 studies, respectively. Data extraction. Meta-analysis was unsuitable due to output variability. Attributes relating to study design, scalability and independence of outcome data were collected. For the benefit studies, we also assessed the strength of claim that accreditation improved patient safety and quality, and sources of potential bias. Results of data synthesis. The incremental costs ranged from 0.2 to 1.7% of total costs averaged over the accreditation cycle. The benefit studies were inconclusive in terms of showing clear evidence that accreditation improves patient safety and quality of care. Conclusion. The lack of formal economic appraisal makes it difficult to evaluate accreditation in comparison to other methods to improve patient safety and quality of care. The lack of a clear relationship between accreditation and the outcomes measured in the benefit studies makes it difficult to design and conduct such appraisals without a more robust and explicit understanding of the costs and benefits involved. © The Author 2013.	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	International Journal for Quality in Health Care	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1093/intqhc/mzt059	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Health Policy & Services	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Humans	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Health Services	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Costs and Cost Analysis	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Cost-Benefit Analysis	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Accreditation	en_US
dc.subject.mesh	Quality of Health Care	en_US
dc.title	Health services accreditation: What is the evidence that the benefits justify the costs?	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	5	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	25	en_US
utslib.for	1117 Public Health and Health Services	en_US
utslib.for	11 Medical and Health Sciences	en_US
utslib.for	17 Psychology and Cognitive Sciences	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.issue	5	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	25	en_US

Abstract:

Purpose. To identify and analyse research on the use of economic evaluation in health services accreditation. Data sources. Seven online health and economic databases, and key accreditation agency and health department websites were searched between June and December 2011. Study selection. The selection criteria were English language and published empirical research studies on the topic of economic evaluation of health service accreditation. No formal economic evaluation of health services accreditation has been carried out to date. Empirical data on costs and benefits were analysed in 6 and 15 studies, respectively. Data extraction. Meta-analysis was unsuitable due to output variability. Attributes relating to study design, scalability and independence of outcome data were collected. For the benefit studies, we also assessed the strength of claim that accreditation improved patient safety and quality, and sources of potential bias. Results of data synthesis. The incremental costs ranged from 0.2 to 1.7% of total costs averaged over the accreditation cycle. The benefit studies were inconclusive in terms of showing clear evidence that accreditation improves patient safety and quality of care. Conclusion. The lack of formal economic appraisal makes it difficult to evaluate accreditation in comparison to other methods to improve patient safety and quality of care. The lack of a clear relationship between accreditation and the outcomes measured in the benefit studies makes it difficult to design and conduct such appraisals without a more robust and explicit understanding of the costs and benefits involved. © The Author 2013.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/117323