Jafar S. Tabrizi*, Farid Gharibi, Andrew J. Wilson
Abstract
Background: This systematic review seeks to define the general advantages and disadvantages of accreditation programs to assist in choosing the most appropriate approach. Method: Systematic search of SID, Ovid Medline & PubMed databases was conducted by the keywords of accreditation, hospital, medical practice, clinic, accreditation models, health care and Persian meanings. From 2379 initial articles, 83 articles met the full inclusion criteria. From initial analysis, 23 attributes were identified which appeared to define advantages and disadvantages of different accreditation approaches and the available systems were compared on these. Results: Six systems were identified in the international literature including the JCAHO from USA, the Canadian program of CCHSA, and the accreditation programs of UK, Australia, New Zealand and France. The main distinguishing attributes among them were: quality improvement, patient and staff safety, improving health services integration, public’s confidence, effectiveness and efficiency of health services, innovation, influence global standards, information management, breadth of activity, history, effective relationship with stakeholders, agreement with AGIL attributes and independence from government. Conclusion: Based on 23 attributes of comprehensive accreditation systems we have defined from a systematic review, the JCAHO accreditation program of USA and then CCHSA of Canada offered the most comprehensive systems with the least disadvantages. Other programs such as the ACHS of Australia, ANAES of France, QHNZ of New Zealand and UK accreditation programs were fairly comparable according to these criteria. However the decision for any country or health system should be based on an assessment weighing up their specific objectives and needs.