The revised accreditation standards for Lebanon were completed in December 2003. The initial standards were divided into two parts, basic standards and accreditation standards, both with corresponding guidelines. The revised standards will now be combined into one set on standards. Previously the guidelines were presented separately they will now in every instance precede the set of standards for which they apply. The guidelines which were prescriptive in nature will now be written in a narrative form to allow for flexibility of interpretation. The paradigm of interpretative flexibility allows for the uniqueness of each hospital, their demographics, patient population and geographical positioning. However, as hospitals choose to demonstrate this flexibility, work activities, policies and procedures must be supported by current theories and practices as demonstrated by research. Policies and procedure must be hospital specific and commensurate with work practices. The original standards were mainly processed based. The intention behind this was to facilitate the genesis of the accreditation process and responded appropriately to the results from the pilot study. Process based standards were used as the platform for establishing quality improvement systems throughout Lebanon. Process based standards do not allow for measurement of an effect they have on outcomes or whether the standards are operationalized. Whereas outcome based standards demand that outcomes are measured and evaluated. For this reason the new standards, some of which contain all or some elements of the previous standards are very specific and a proportion are now outcome based. Since the inception of this project in 2000, 167 hospital audits have been conducted. It is propitious to move to the next phase of accreditation which is from having all process based standards to a combination of process and outcome based standards. Outcome based standards are the foundation for completing the quality loop. The guidelines now will give an overview of the crucial facets of a department or service to be considered in order to comply with the standards. The expectation is that hospital staff research relevant, current theory and practice and apply the newly acquired knowledge to their unique situation. A quality improvement system demands that the dynamic process of continued applied research underpins all activities. The terminology policy and procedure with only two references to protocols. This decision was deliberate to clarify and differentiate between all three. In diagrammatical format policies sit above procedures and protocols are invariably subsumed as part of a procedure. A policy is a non renegotiable in this case, hospital rule, with respect to a specific issue. The rule may be changed but it requires a concomitant policy change approved by a nominated person or body. One policy may apply to many procedures. A procedure is an action that is to occur. It must however, be congruent to its related policy. A protocol is a specific component of a procedure and may take the form of an algorithm. The introduction of quality improvement activities requires an investment of human resources, time, effort and money. It is absolutely imperative that the commitment to quality improvement activities commences with and is supported by senior management. All levels of staff, irrespective of their roles and responsibilities must be aware of the hospital committee to quality improvement and how it impacts on their day to day work. This frequently requires a cultural shift whereby all employees contribute in a dynamic way towards the implementation of quality improvement and its success.
Achieving accreditation is a major mile stone and reflects the highest level of staff cooperation and commitment to the work environment. It is therefore suggested that management take the opportunity to celebrate such achievement with their staff.
|
||
