2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/601729
Category:
Full-text
Format:
Text-based Document
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Accreditation Benefits of Federally Qualified Clinics
Other Titles:
Creating and Sustaining Programs Using Evidence [Session]
Author(s):
Curnayn, Kellyann
Lead Author STTI Affiliation:
Alpha Theta
Author Details:
Kellyann Curnayn, ARNP, kcurna@ufl.edu
Abstract:
Session presented on Thursday, July 23, 2015: Purpose: Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are currently the nation's largest primary health care provider group with a projected patient census of 40 million patients by 2015. Accreditation of FQHCs is a federally endorsed process recognized as creating a framework to deliver increased quality of care. Nurse practitioners and nurses at the frontline of community health provide the microsystem level impetus to improve health in the populations they serve, and accreditation places pre-determined guidelines and standards in place that set the stage for macrosystem level redesign. However, sufficient empirical data showing improved clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness related to accreditation do not exist. This study analyzes benefits and costs incurred by FQHCs as a result of the accreditation process. Methods: Using a semi-structured interview process, the data were collected from administrators of FQHCs that have obtained Joint Commission accreditation. The interview sessions were 'directed toward qualitative/quantitative informationabout the benefits and costs associated with obtaining and maintaining accreditation status. Data were analyzed using qualitative, descriptive, and multivariate methods.'Results: Participants agreed that the process helped create a framework for specific quality indicator reporting by programs and departments. Participants were unable to make a clear distinction between costs that could be directly attributed to daily operations versus costs specific to the accreditation process, particularly in facilities that had been through more than one cycle of renewal. Although the process within inpatient facilities had historically consisted of chart reviews, FQHCs reported a greater focus on examination of clinical outcomes and patient specific processes in administering services. None of the participants knew the actual cost of the accreditation processing fees incurred every three years.' Conclusion: Improved clinical outcomes were perceived to be associated with accreditation, and the cost of accreditation was either unknown or relatively indiscernible from every day clinical operations; further research is needed. The power of this review process is most effective if all parties involved are aware of the costs, the effectiveness and the outcomes achieved. Structural design of FQHCs should empower and recognize the importance of nursing at the frontline in wellness centers, community clinics, schools, and public health. It is imperative that those responsible for the delivery of these services guide innovation, with the opportunity for frontline providers to give candid feedback on the processes.The effect of accreditation on innovation, work flow processes and resources needed to improve clinical outcomes in FQHCs should be examined in future studies.
Keywords:
The Joint Commission; Accreditation; Health outcomes
Repository Posting Date:
17-Mar-2016
Date of Publication:
17-Mar-2016 ; 17-Mar-2016
Other Identifiers:
INRC15A10
Conference Date:
2015
Conference Name:
26th International Nursing Research Congress
Conference Host:
Sigma Theta Tau International, the Honor Society of Nursing
Conference Location:
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Description:
Research Congress 2015 Theme: Question Locally, Engage Regionally, Apply Globally. Held at the Puerto Rico Convention Center.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.language.isoenen
dc.type.categoryFull-texten
dc.formatText-based Documenten
dc.typePresentationen
dc.titleAccreditation Benefits of Federally Qualified Clinicsen
dc.title.alternativeCreating and Sustaining Programs Using Evidence [Session]en
dc.contributor.authorCurnayn, Kellyannen
dc.contributor.departmentAlpha Thetaen
dc.author.detailsKellyann Curnayn, ARNP, kcurna@ufl.eduen
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/601729-
dc.description.abstractSession presented on Thursday, July 23, 2015: Purpose: Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are currently the nation's largest primary health care provider group with a projected patient census of 40 million patients by 2015. Accreditation of FQHCs is a federally endorsed process recognized as creating a framework to deliver increased quality of care. Nurse practitioners and nurses at the frontline of community health provide the microsystem level impetus to improve health in the populations they serve, and accreditation places pre-determined guidelines and standards in place that set the stage for macrosystem level redesign. However, sufficient empirical data showing improved clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness related to accreditation do not exist. This study analyzes benefits and costs incurred by FQHCs as a result of the accreditation process. Methods: Using a semi-structured interview process, the data were collected from administrators of FQHCs that have obtained Joint Commission accreditation. The interview sessions were 'directed toward qualitative/quantitative informationabout the benefits and costs associated with obtaining and maintaining accreditation status. Data were analyzed using qualitative, descriptive, and multivariate methods.'Results: Participants agreed that the process helped create a framework for specific quality indicator reporting by programs and departments. Participants were unable to make a clear distinction between costs that could be directly attributed to daily operations versus costs specific to the accreditation process, particularly in facilities that had been through more than one cycle of renewal. Although the process within inpatient facilities had historically consisted of chart reviews, FQHCs reported a greater focus on examination of clinical outcomes and patient specific processes in administering services. None of the participants knew the actual cost of the accreditation processing fees incurred every three years.' Conclusion: Improved clinical outcomes were perceived to be associated with accreditation, and the cost of accreditation was either unknown or relatively indiscernible from every day clinical operations; further research is needed. The power of this review process is most effective if all parties involved are aware of the costs, the effectiveness and the outcomes achieved. Structural design of FQHCs should empower and recognize the importance of nursing at the frontline in wellness centers, community clinics, schools, and public health. It is imperative that those responsible for the delivery of these services guide innovation, with the opportunity for frontline providers to give candid feedback on the processes.The effect of accreditation on innovation, work flow processes and resources needed to improve clinical outcomes in FQHCs should be examined in future studies.en
dc.subjectThe Joint Commissionen
dc.subjectAccreditationen
dc.subjectHealth outcomesen
dc.date.available2016-03-17T12:53:58Zen
dc.date.issued2016-03-17-
dc.date.issued2016-03-17en
dc.date.accessioned2016-03-17T12:53:58Zen
dc.conference.date2015en
dc.conference.name26th International Nursing Research Congressen
dc.conference.hostSigma Theta Tau International, the Honor Society of Nursingen
dc.conference.locationSan Juan, Puerto Ricoen
dc.descriptionResearch Congress 2015 Theme: Question Locally, Engage Regionally, Apply Globally. Held at the Puerto Rico Convention Center.en
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.