A retrospective review of how nonconformities are expressed and finalized in external inspections of health-care facilities

5Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: External inspections are widely used in health care as a means of improving the quality of care. However, the way external inspections affect the involved organization is poorly understood. A better understanding of these processes is important to improve our understanding of the varying effects of external inspections in different organizations. In turn, this can contribute to the development of more effective ways of conducting inspections. The way the inspecting organization states their grounds for noncompliant behavior and subsequently follows up to enforce the necessary changes can have implications for the inspected organization's change process. We explore how inspecting organizations express and state their grounds for noncompliant behavior and how they follow up to enforce improvements. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review, in which we performed a content analysis of the documents from 36 external inspections in Norway. Our analysis was guided by Donabedian's structure, process, and outcome model. Results: Deficiencies in the management system in combination with clinical work processes was considered as nonconformity by the inspecting organizations. Two characteristic patterns were identified in the way observations led to a statement of nonconformity: one in which it was clearly demonstrated how deficiencies in the management system could affect clinical processes, and one in which this connection was not demonstrated. Two characteristic patterns were also identified in the way the inspecting organization followed up and finalized their inspection: one in which the inspection was finalized solely based on the documented changes in structural deficiencies addressed in the nonconformity statement, and one based on the documented changes in structural and process deficiencies addressed in the nonconformity statement. Conclusion: External inspections are performed to improve the quality of care. To accomplish this aim, we suggest that nonconformities should be grounded by observations that clearly demonstrate how deficiencies in the management system might affect the clinical processes, and that the inspection should be finalized based on documented changes in both structural and process deficiencies addressed in the nonconformity statement.

References Powered by Scopus

Three approaches to qualitative content analysis

28415Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The Quality of Care: How Can It Be Assessed?

5099Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

From best evidence to best practice: Effective implementation of change in patients' care

3454Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

External inspection of compliance with standards for improved healthcare outcomes

62Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Understanding the impact of accreditation on quality in healthcare: A grounded theory approach

35Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Next of kin involvement in regulatory investigations of adverse events that caused patient death: A process evaluation (Part i - The Next of Kin's Perspective)

23Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hovlid, E., Høifødt, H., Smedbråten, B., & Braut, G. S. (2015, September 23). A retrospective review of how nonconformities are expressed and finalized in external inspections of health-care facilities. BMC Health Services Research. BioMed Central Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-1068-9

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 9

69%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

15%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

8%

Researcher 1

8%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 6

43%

Business, Management and Accounting 5

36%

Psychology 2

14%

Design 1

7%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free