Pay for Quality
Pay for Quality
Pay for Quality
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
120 <strong>Pay</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Quality</strong> KCE Reports 118<br />
outcome)<br />
Type of indicators used (if any) Structure indicators (the following list is not complete): staff size,<br />
scientific activity (total citation score of the team, clinical<br />
research) quality of room, of food, additional services to patients<br />
(psychological and social support, pain clinic, esthetical care,<br />
revalidation).<br />
Process indicators (the following list is not complete):<br />
attractiveness index, safety index, check in- diagnosis delay,<br />
diagnosis-treatment delay.<br />
Outcome indicators (the following list is not complete): diseasefree<br />
survival in cancer, quality of life.<br />
Purpose of indicators used To publicly rank hospital per<strong>for</strong>mance<br />
Type of incentives Selection as a centre of reference if selection criteria<br />
demonstrate that a certain threshold is reached.<br />
Results (if available) Not available<br />
Sources (most relevant ones) Not available<br />
Total budget Not available<br />
Table 17: Hospital accreditation<br />
XI. HOSPITAL ACCREDITATION<br />
Initiated by Hospitals in cooperation with an accreditation body (Joint<br />
Commission International, Nederlands Instituut voor<br />
Accreditatie van Ziekenhuizen (NIAZ), International Office <strong>for</strong><br />
Standardization (ISO))<br />
Overall objective To publicly recognize the level of quality of care offered by a<br />
hospital<br />
Date of implementation in Hospital specific (2000, 2006…)<br />
Belgium<br />
Target audience Hospitals, including both its managers as professional care<br />
providers<br />
Content Initiatives to externally assess hospital per<strong>for</strong>mance against predefined<br />
explicit published standards in order to encourage<br />
continuous improvement of the health care quality. Target<br />
standards are applied as intermediate endpoints to achieve.<br />
Primary focus (structure, process,<br />
outcome)<br />
These may cover the entire process model of a hospital.<br />
Main focus on structure and process. There is a current lack of<br />
using (intermediate) outcome measures to evaluate programme<br />
results.<br />
Type of indicators used (if any) Limited clinical indicator use due to a focus on organisational and<br />
transversal aspects which are not addressed in current available<br />
databases. The choice of indicators is mainly accreditation body<br />
specific. Examples are the availability of guideline support<br />
(structure) and the actual use of guideline support (process) in<br />
medical decision making.<br />
Purpose of indicators used To improve quality and to strengthen public accountability.<br />
Accreditation results in a periodic ‘award’ of recognition.<br />
Type of incentives An accreditation initiative often includes charging external<br />
services to a hospital by a fee or subscription, next to a cost<br />
increase working towards standards. There is no direct positive<br />
financial incentive present. Indirectly, a positive public recognition<br />
may improve the financial status through higher patient volumes.<br />
Results (if available) Evidence is lacking.<br />
Sources (most relevant ones)<br />
258<br />
Total budget Undisclosed and programme specific