Search

With the rapid acceleration of changes being experienced throughout the world and in particular within health and health and social care, accreditation programmes must keep pace or go the way of the dinosaur. While accreditation has deep roots in some countries, in the past 30 years, it has spread to a considerably larger range of countries in a mix of mandatory and voluntary systems. Accreditation is a tool to improve the quality of healthcare and social care, and in particular, there is recent recognition of its value in low- and middle-income countries, with promotion by the World Health Organization (WHO). The challenge is that with the rapid pace of change, how does accreditation reframe and reposition itself to ensure relevance in 2030? Accreditation must adapt and be relevant in order to be sustainable. This article outlines the fundamental principles, reviews the global trends' impact on accreditation and the challenges with the existing model and, through the lens of living in 2030, outlines how accreditation programmes will be structured and applied 10 years from now., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Healthcare is amongst the most complex of human systems. Coordinating activities and integrating newer with older ways of treating patients while delivering high-quality, safe care, is challenging. Three landmark reports in 2018 led by (1) the Lancet Global Health Commission, (2) a coalition of the World Health Organization, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the World Bank, and (3) the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine of the United States propose that health systems need to tackle care quality, create less harm and provide universal health coverage in all nations, but especially low- and middle-income countries. The objective of this study is to review these reports with the aim of advancing the discussion beyond a conceptual diagnosis of quality gaps into identification of practical opportunities for transforming health systems by 2030., Main Body: We analysed the reports via text-mining techniques and content analyses to derive their key themes and concepts. Initiatives to make progress include better measurement, using the capacities of information and communications technologies, taking a systems view of change, supporting systems to be constantly improving, creating learning health systems and undergirding progress with effective research and evaluation. Our analysis suggests that the world needs to move from 2018, the year of reports, to the 2020s, the decade of action. We propose three initiatives to support this move: first, developing a blueprint for change, modifiable to each country's circumstances, to give effect to the reports' recommendations; second, to make tangible steps to reduce inequities within and across health systems, including redistributing resources to areas of greatest need; and third, learning from what goes right to complement current efforts focused on reducing things going wrong. We provide examples of targeted funding which would have major benefits, reduce inequalities, promote universality and be better at learning from successes as well as failures., Conclusion: The reports contain many recommendations, but lack an integrated, implementable, 10-year action plan for the next decade to give effect to their aims to improve care to the most vulnerable, save lives by providing high-quality healthcare and shift to measuring and ensuring better systems- and patient-level outcomes. This article signals what needs to be done to achieve these aims.

While it is widely recognized that accreditation enables an organization to improve its performance and sustain a culture of quality, changing healthcare practices to align with evidence-informed guidelines (clinical and administrative) is a complex process that takes time. The true value of accreditation lies in its contribution to healthcare safety and quality as a means to prompt and support 'knowledge to action', a key value of accreditation that 'has yet to be articulated'. Using the 'knowledge to action' cycle, a planned action framework, we illustrate that accreditation is a knowledge translation (KT) or implementation intervention that seeks to improve and increase the uptake of evidence in healthcare organizations. The accreditation components, including the quality framework, standards, self-assessment process and on-site survey visit, ultimately serve to improve quality, decreasing variation in practice and strengthening a culture of quality. With a unique perspective and alignment obtained through the implementation lens, we examine the accreditation process and components relative to the 'knowledge to action cycle' with implications for enhancing the value of accreditation beyond current appreciation to both accreditation bodies worldwide and those organizations that participate in accreditation programs. Until organizations and accreditation bodies embrace the accreditation process as a knowledge to action intervention to bring about meaningful and sustained change, the full benefits of the process will not be optimized nor achieved., (© The Author(s) 2020. 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.)

Health systems are under more pressure than ever before, and the challenges are multiplying and accelerating. Economic forces, new technology, genomics, AI in medicine, increasing demands for care-all are playing a part, or are predicted to increasingly do so. Above all, ageing populations in many parts of the world are exacerbating the disease burden on the system and intensifying the requirements to provide effective care equitably to citizens. In this first of two companion articles on behalf of the Innovation and Systems Change Working Group of the International Society for Quality in Health Care (ISQua), in consultation with representatives from over 40 countries, we assess this situation and discuss the implications for safety and quality. Health systems will need to run ahead of the coming changes and learn how to cope better with more people with more chronic and acute illnesses needing care. This will require collective ingenuity, and a deep desire to reconfigure healthcare and re-engineer services. Chief amongst the successful strategies, we argue, will be preventative approaches targeting both physical and psychological health, paying attention to the determinants of health, keeping people at home longer, experimenting with new governance and financial models, creating novel incentives, upskilling workforces to fit them for the future, redesigning care teams and transitioning from a system delivering episodic care to one that looks after people across the life cycle. There are opportunities for the international community to learn together to revitalise their health systems in a time of change and upheaval., (© The Author(s) 2018. 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.)

In Part 2 of this two-part contribution made on behalf of the Innovation and Systems Change Working Group of the International Society for Quality in Health Care (ISQua), we continue the argument for refashioning health systems in response to ageing and other pressures. Massive ageing in many countries and accompanying technological, fiscal and systems changes are causing the tectonic plates of healthcare to shift in ways not yet fully appreciated. In response, while things remain uncertain, we nevertheless have to find ways to proceed. We propose a strategy for stakeholders to pursue, of key importance and relevance to the ISQua: to harness flexible standards and external assessment in support of needed change. Depending on how they are used, healthcare standards and accreditation can promote, or hinder, the changes needed to create better healthcare for all in the future. Standards should support people's care needs across the life cycle, including prevention and health promotion. New standards that emphasise better coordination of care, those that address the entire healthcare journey and standards that reflect and predict technological changes and support new models of care can play a part. To take advantage of these opportunities, governance bodies, external assessment agencies and other authorities will need to be less prescriptive and better at developing more flexible standards that apply to the entire health journey, incorporating new definitions of excellence and acceptability. The ISQua welcomes playing a leadership role., (© The Author(s) 2018. 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.)

Most research on health systems examines contemporary problems within one, or at most a few, countries. Breaking with this tradition, we present a series of case studies in a book written by key policymakers, scholars and experts, looking at health systems and their projected successes to 2030. Healthcare Systems: Future Predictions for Global Care includes chapters on 52 individual countries and five regions, covering a total of 152 countries. Synthesised, two key contributions are made in this compendium. First, five trends shaping the future healthcare landscape are analysed: sustainable health systems; the genomics revolution; emerging technologies; global demographics dynamics; and new models of care. Second, nine main themes arise from the chapters: integration of healthcare services; financing, economics and insurance; patient-based care and empowering the patient; universal healthcare; technology and information technology; aging populations; preventative care; accreditation, standards, and policy; and human development, education and training. These five trends and nine themes can be used as a blueprint for change. They can help strengthen the efforts of stakeholders interested in reform, ranging from international bodies such as the World Health Organization, the International Society for Quality in Health Care and the World Bank, through to national bodies such as health departments, quality and safety agencies, non-government organisations (NGO) and other groups with an interest in improving healthcare delivery systems. This compendium offers more than a glimpse into the future of healthcare-it provides a roadmap to help shape thinking about the next generation of caring systems, extrapolated over the next 15 years.

Although significant advances have occurred in medical and related sciences, the quality improvement and patient safety movements have been slow to gain traction. There are many "pockets" of progress around the globe; however, the scale and spread has been slow. Stimulating culture and system change in healthcare requires a definitive change in leadership style and approach. Health leaders of today must commit to the critical success factors and demonstrate the attributes necessary to create change and raise the bar for quality improvement and safety.

Healthcare systems across the world are experiencing increased financial, organizational and social pressures attributable to a range of critical issues including the challenge of ageing populations. Health systems need to adapt, in order to sustainably provide quality care to the widest range of patients, particularly those with chronic and complex diseases, and especially those in vulnerable and low-income groups. We report on a workshop designed to tackle such issues under the auspices of ISQua, with representatives from Argentina, Australia, Canada, Columbia, Denmark, Emirates, France, Ireland, Jordan, Qatar, Malaysia, Norway, Oman, UK, South Africa and Switzerland. We discuss some of the challenges facing healthcare systems in countries ageing rapidly, to those less so, and touch on current and future reform options., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press in association with the International Society for Quality in Health Care; all rights reserved.)

Across Canada and internationally, the public and governments at all levels have increasing expectations for quality of care, value for healthcare dollars and accountability. Within this reality, there is increasing recognition of the value of accreditation as a barometer of quality and as a tool to assess and improve accountability and efficiency in healthcare delivery. In this commentary, we show how three key attributes of the Accreditation Canada Qmentum accreditation program--measurement, scalability and currency - promote accountability in healthcare., (Copyright © 2014 Longwoods Publishing.)

Background: Over the past decade, the need for healthcare delivery systems to identify and address patient safety issues has been propelled to the forefront. A Canadian survey, for example, demonstrated patient safety to be a major concern of frontline nurses (Nicklin & McVeety 2002). Three crucial patient safety elements, current knowledge, resources, and context of care have been identified by the World Health Organization (WHO 2009). To develop strategies to respond to the scope and mandate of the WHO report within the Canadian context, a pan-Canadian academic-policy partnership has been established., Approach: This newly formed Pan-Canadian Partnership, the Queen's Joanna Briggs Collaboration for Patient Safety (referred throughout as "QJBC" or "the Partnership"), includes the Queen's University School of Nursing, Accreditation Canada, the Canadian Patient Safety Institute (CPSI), the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, and is supported by an active and committed advisory council representing over 10 national organizations representing all sectors of the health continuum, including patients/families advocacy groups, professional associations, and other bodies. This unique partnership is designed to provide timely, focused support from academia to the front line of patient safety. QJBC has adopted an "integrated knowledge translation" approach to identify and respond to patient safety priorities and to ensure active engagement with stakeholders in producing and using available knowledge. Synthesis of evidence and guideline adaptation methodologies are employed to access quantitative and qualitative evidence relevant to pertinent patient safety questions and subsequently, to respond to issues of feasibility, meaningfulness, appropriateness/acceptability, and effectiveness., Summary: This paper describes the conceptual grounding of the Partnership, its proposed methods, and its plan for action. It is hoped that our journey may provide some guidance to others as they develop patient safety models within their own arenas., (©2011 Sigma Theta Tau International.)