HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pomey, M-P Articles by Bertrand, D Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pomey, M-P Articles by Bertrand, D Topic Collections Relevant Article

Paradoxes of French accreditation

¹ Faculty of Management, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada
² Laboratoire GREQ-Santé, Faculté de médecine, Université de Grenoble, France
³ Département d’administration de la santé, Faculté de médecine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
⁴ Service de santé publique, Hôpital Fernand-Vidal, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France

Correspondence to:
Dr M-P Pomey
Faculty of Management, University of Ottawa, 136 Jean-Jacques Lussier St, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada; pomey{at}management.uottawa.ca
ABSTRACT
The accreditation system introduced into the French healthcare system in 1996 has five particular characteristics: (1) it is mandatory for all healthcare establishments; (2) it is performed by an independent government agency; (3) surveyors have to report all instances of non-compliance with safety regulations; (4) the accreditation report is delivered to regional administrative authorities and a summary is made available to the public; and (5) regional administrative authorities can use the information contained in the accreditation report to revise hospital budgets. These give rise to a number of paradoxes: (1) the fact that accreditation is mandatory lends itself to ambiguity and likens the process to an inspection; (2) the fact that decision makers can use the information contained in the accreditation report for resource allocation can incite establishments to adopt strategic behaviours aimed merely at complying with the accreditation manual; and (3) there is a tendency for establishments to reduce quality processes to nothing more than the completion of accreditation and to focus efforts on standardizing practices and resolving safety issues to the detriment of organizational development. All accreditation systems must be aware of these paradoxes and decide on the level of government involvement and the relationship between accreditation and resource allocation. With time, accreditation in France could benefit from both a professionally driven system and from the increased amount of freedom to focus on quality improvement which is necessary for organizational development.

Keywords: accreditation; French healthcare system; quality improvement

Relevant Article

Quality Lines
Qual. Saf. Health Care 2005 14: 1. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. Greenfield and J. Braithwaite Health sector accreditation research: a systematic review Int. J. Qual. Health Care, June 1, 2008; 20(3): 172 - 183. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Duclos, F. Gillaizeau, I. Colombet, J. Coste, and P. Durieux Health staff perception regarding quality of delivered information to inpatients Int. J. Qual. Health Care, February 1, 2008; 20(1): 13 - 21. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Polluste, J. Habicht, R. Kalda, and M. Lember Quality improvement in the Estonian health system--assessment of progress using an international tool Int. J. Qual. Health Care, December 1, 2006; 18(6): 403 - 413. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]