Quality Improvement in Health Care (한국의료질향상학회지)

Korean Society for Quality in Health Care (한국의료질향상학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Deriving Criteria Weights for Acute Care Hospital Accreditation in South Korea: Using Analytic Hierarchy Process

급성기병원 인증기준의 가중치 도출: 계층적 분석법을 활용하여

  • Hwa Yeong Oh (Division of Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency) ;
  • Hyeon-Jeong Lee (Division of Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidencebased Healthcare Collaborating Agency) ;
  • Minsu Ock (Task Forces to Support Public Health and Medical Services in Ulsan Metropolitan City) ;
  • In Ho Kim (Division of Healthcare Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency) ;
  • Ho Yeol Jang (Division of Healthcare Research, National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency) ;
  • Ji-Eun Choi (Division of Healthcare Technology Assessment Research, National Evidencebased Healthcare Collaborating Agency)
  • 오화영 (한국보건의료연구원 보건의료평가연구본부) ;
  • 이현정 (한국보건의료연구원 보건의료평가연구본부) ;
  • 옥민수 (울산광역시 공공보건의료지원단) ;
  • 김인호 (한국보건의료연구원 보건의료연구본부) ;
  • 장호열 (한국보건의료연구원 보건의료연구본부) ;
  • 최지은 (한국보건의료연구원 보건의료평가연구본부)
  • Received : 2023.12.29
  • Accepted : 2024.04.11
  • Published : 2024.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose:The acute hospital accreditation program launched in South Korea has shown positive effects on safety culture and quality of care. However, relative weights have not yet been investigated for accreditation criteria with a hierarchical structure. This study aimed to derive the relative weights of acute-care hospital accreditation criteria. Methods: We conducted an online survey using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) technique to assess the validity, importance, and urgency of acute hospital accreditation criteria. The AHP online survey link was distributed in November 2022 after obtaining informed consent from 10 experts in hospital accreditation. Results: 'Basic value system' ranked highest, while 'patient care system' ranked second in terms of validity, importance, and urgency. 'Performance management system' had the lowest validity and urgency, while 'organizational management system' carried the lowest importance. Within the 'patient care system' domain, 'surgery and anesthesia sedation management' scored highest in validity and importance, and 'patient care' scored highest in urgency. 'Care delivery system and evaluation' received the lowest scores for all three aspects. In the 'organizational management system' domain, infection control ranked highest in terms of validity, importance, and urgency. The lowest validity was observed for 'management and organizational operation' and the lowest importance and urgency were noted for 'human resource management'. Conclusion: The weights for validity, importance, and urgency, as shown in each domain and chapter, and the number of measurable elements included, are largely inconsistent. This study will contribute to the development of the structure and scientific improvement of accreditation standards.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by Ministry of Health and Welfare and National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (Project number NECA-S-22-016; Publication number 11-1352000-003605-01)

References

  1. Kim YH. A study on the performance and improvement directions of accreditation system. Journal of Korean Society Quality Assurance Health Care. 2011;17(1):21. 
  2. Kim GH. Status of laws related to Korea's medical institution certification system. Korea Legislation Research Institute. 2017;17(9):5-36. 
  3. Kim JE, Shin KA, Shin MK, Shin JJ, Lee HH. Challenges in Korea Hospital Accreditation: Focused on Post-Accreditation Management System. Quality Improvement in Health Care. 2018;24(1):1-8. 
  4. Korea Institute for Healthcare Accreditation. Accreditation standards for 3rd cycle acute care hospitals. Seoul, Korea: Korea Institute for Healthcare Accreditation; 2018. 
  5. Ministry of Health and Welfare. Accredited organizations [Internet]. Sejong, Korea: Ministry of Health and Welfare; 2023 [cited 2024 Feb 27]. Available from: https://www.mohw.go.kr/menu.es?mid=a10702030200. 
  6. Jeong HS, Jeong HW, Goo HR, Kim SG, Kim SA, Woo SH. A Study of Development and Application of Social Cohesion Index. Sejong, Korea: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs. 2016. 
  7. Seo YJ, Lee GS, Shin HB, Song HJ, Lim MK, Go AR. Medical Institution Certification System Performance Measurement Analysis Frame Study (Phase 2). Wonju, Korea: Yonsei University Wonju Campus University-Industry Foundation; 2019. 
  8. Kim SK, Song HJ, So YK, Shin HG, Jeong YM. Medical institution certification system performance measurement analysis frame study (Phase 1). Seoul, Korea: National Evidence based Healthcare Collaborating Agency; 2017. 
  9. Baek SG. Policy academy theory. Seoul, Korea: Daeyoung Culture Company; 2005. 
  10. Min BK, Kim HB, Lee CJ, Heo JH, Kang JH. Future Determining Policy Research. Seoul, Korea: National Assembly Futures Institute; 2018. 
  11. Yeo KD, Kim GH, Lee SW. Development of Modified Ratio of Pairwise Comparison for Determining Weighting in AHP. The Korea Spatial Planning Review. 2011;71:25-46. 
  12. Ko KK, Ha HY. Meta Analysis of the Utilization of Analytic Hierarchy Process for Policy Studies in Korea. Korean Policy Studies Review. 2008;17(1):287-313. 
  13. Kim JH, Park JY, Kang SH, Choi SJ. An overview of the analytic hierarchy process. Evidence & Value. 2015;1(1):35-40. 
  14. Forman EH, Selly MA. Decision by objectives: how to convince others that you are right: World Scientific. 2001. 
  15. Saaty TL. Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process: The Organization and Prioritization of Complexity. Pittsburgh, USA: RWS publications; 2001. 
  16. I Make It. Accredited organizations [Internet]. Seoul, Korea: Decision Science; 2014 [cited 2023 October 3]. Available from: http://www.imakeit.kr/info/. 
  17. Yum HK. Management and perspectives of patient safety in healthcare. Journal of the Korean Medical Association. 2013;56(6):454-8. 
  18. Guidelines Review Committee, Integrated Health Services (IHS). Guidelines on core components of infection prevention and control programmes at the national and acute health care facility level. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016. 
  19. Cheong HS, Kwon KT, Hwang SY, Kim SW, Chang HH, Park SY, et al. Workload of Healthcare Workers During the COVID-19 Outbreak in Korea: A Nationwide Survey. Journal of the Korean Medical Science. 2022;37(6):e49. 
  20. Camacho-Rodriguez DE, Carrasquilla-Baza DA, Dominguez-Cancino KA, Palmieri PA. Patient Safety Culture in Latin American Hospitals: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022;19(21):14380. 
  21. Bord S, Sass I, Hayms G, Moskowitz K, Baruch H, Basis F. Involvement and skepticism towards the JCI Accreditation process among hospital's four sectors employees: suggestions for cultural change. Israel Journal of Health Policy Research. 2021;10(1):74. 
  22. Akdemir N, Malik R, Walters T, Hamstra S, Scheele F. Clinicians' perspectives on quality: do they match accreditation standards? Hum Resour Health. 2021;19(1):75. 
  23. Mosadeghrad AM, Ghazanfari F. Developing a hospital accreditation model: a Delphi study. BMC Health Services Research. 2021;21(1):879.