In many areas, the accreditation process is mandatory for organizations to be able to carry out activities in this direction. In this context, the healthcare field is an exception, as accreditation and licensing for facilities are separate (“Accreditation definitions,” n.d.). The first process is optional in most cases, while the second is necessary to provide medical services. However, this situation raises the question of the need and importance of accreditation as an institution. This essay aims to explore this issue and examine the impact of accreditation bodies.
The importance of this process and associated bodies in other contexts is usually not in question. However, in the health sector, accreditation is seen not as admission to work but as a tool to improve practice (Hussein et al., 2022). Unlike licensing, going through this process allows an institution to pass a peer review of its internal structures and operating principles. Such checks identify weaknesses that can be improved for better service delivery. High-quality passage of such a procedure and subsequent adherence to the developed instructions can significantly improve the quality of care provided to patients. In addition, according to Kavak et al. (2020), these procedures allow the organization to better prepare for emergencies such as epidemics and pandemics. Thus, accreditation is vital for any medical institution seeking to provide the highest quality medical care.
Consequently, the accrediting institutions are also significant health sector entities. The assessments will be made based on the standards they promote and the frameworks adopted by them. As a result, they affect the course of development that medical organizations will choose. Due to this, such bodies have significant weight and have a considerable impact on the entire public health field. Moreover, experience shows that accrediting institutions and their activities positively influence health professions’ education (Frank et al., 2020). This is because such organizations set the quality standards that professionals must follow to work in clinics. In addition, the more influence the accrediting body has in the community, the more value the criteria they propagate are given and the more authoritative they are.
However, in this context, several points may embody the potential weaknesses of such a practice. They are associated with an insufficient number of accrediting bodies in the public health community. While, on the one hand, having unified standards for all clinics can be an advantage, centralizing accreditation powers in one institution is too dangerous. In a sense, this situation is similar to a monopoly in the market since, in this case, the organization also can dictate its terms without any competition.
In addition, although accreditation programs are essential for healthcare, they are subject to stringent quality requirements. Similar requirements are put forward for the bodies associated with them, as they must demonstrate the ideal practice (Mosadeghrad, 2021). Simultaneously, the concentration of influence within one organization leaves too many opportunities to form insufficiently high-quality accreditation practices. Even if such a singular body does not have enough quality techniques or a lack of resources, clinics will still be forced to turn to them due to the lack of an alternative. This process can lead to poor practices in healthcare facilities (Mosadeghrad, 2021). Consequently, the presence of a single accreditation institution has more negative than positive aspects.
Thus, it can be concluded that accreditation in the context of the healthcare sector is a fundamental process. It allows not only to improve the quality of services provided constantly but also to better train specialists. However, for a quality accreditation process, the associated bodies must meet a strict set of criteria to ensure a quality research and review process. Simultaneously, the centralization of such standards may be undesirable, as it leaves no alternative for clinics. This forces them to interact with the few or only available accreditation institutions, despite the quality of their work, which can negatively affect the quality of the medical institution. Therefore, this issue is quite complex and requires a careful approach, considering many healthcare sector criteria.
References
Accreditation definitions. (n.d.). EBMT. Web.
Frank, J. R., Taber, S., van Zanten, M., Scheele, F., & Blouin, D. (2020). The role of accreditation in 21st century health professions education: report of an International Consensus Group. BMC Medical Education, 20(1), 1-9. Web.
Hussein, M., Pavlova, M., & Groot, W. (2022). An evaluation of the driving and restraining factors affecting the implementation of hospital accreditation standards: A force field analysis. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 1-9. Web.
Kavak, D. G., Öksüz, A. S., Cengiz, C., Kayral, I. H., & Şenel, F. Ç. (2020). The importance of quality and accreditation in health care services in the process of struggle against Covid-19. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 50(8), 1760-1770. Web.
Mosadeghrad, A. M. (2021). Hospital accreditation: The good, the bad, and the ugly. International Journal of Healthcare Management, 14(4), 1597-1601. Web.