Cargando…

The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation

INTRODUCTION: The application of organizational ethics in hospitals is one of the novel ways to improve medical ethics. Nowadays achieving efficient and sufficient ethical hospital indicators seems to be inevitable. In this connection, the present study aims to determine the best indicators in hospi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: ENJOO, SEYED ALI, AMINI, MITRA, TABEI, SEYED ZIAADIN, MAHBUDI, ALI, KAVOSI, ZAHRA, SABER, MAHBOOBEH
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4530002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26269789
_version_ 1782384855588274176
author ENJOO, SEYED ALI
AMINI, MITRA
TABEI, SEYED ZIAADIN
MAHBUDI, ALI
KAVOSI, ZAHRA
SABER, MAHBOOBEH
author_facet ENJOO, SEYED ALI
AMINI, MITRA
TABEI, SEYED ZIAADIN
MAHBUDI, ALI
KAVOSI, ZAHRA
SABER, MAHBOOBEH
author_sort ENJOO, SEYED ALI
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The application of organizational ethics in hospitals is one of the novel ways to improve medical ethics. Nowadays achieving efficient and sufficient ethical hospital indicators seems to be inevitable. In this connection, the present study aims to determine the best indicators in hospital accreditation. METHODS: 69 indicators in 11 fields to evaluate hospital ethics were achieved through a five-step qualitative and quantitative study including literature review, expert focus group, Likert scale survey, 3 rounded Delphi, and content validity measurement. Expert focus group meeting was conducted, employing Nominal Group Technique (NGT). After running NGT, a three rounded Delphi and parallel to Delphi and a Likert scale survey were performed to obtain objective indicators for each domain. The experts were all healthcare professionals who were also medical ethics researchers, teachers, or PhD students. Content validity measurements were computed, using the viewpoints of two different expert groups, some ethicists, and some health care professionals (n=46). RESULTS: After conducting NGT, Delphi, Likert survey, 11 main domains were listed including:  Informed consent, Medical confidentiality, Physician-patient economic relations, Ethics consultation policy in the hospital, Ethical charter of hospital, Breaking bad medical news protocol, Respect for the patients’ rights, Clinical ethics committee, Spiritual and palliative care unit programs in the hospitals, Healthcare professionals’ communication skills, and Equitable access to the healthcare. Also 71 objective indicators for these 11 domains were listed in 11 tables with 5 to 8 indicators per table. Content Validity Ratio (CVR) measurements were done and 69 indicators were highlighted. CONCLUSION: The domains listed in this study seem to be the most important ones for evaluating hospital ethics programs and services. Healthcare organizations’ accreditation and ranking are crucial for the improvement of healthcare services. Ethics programs would also motivate hospitals to improve their services and move towards patients’ satisfaction. In this regard, more involvement of bioethicists can help healthcare organizations to develop ethics programs and ensure ethics-based practice in hospitals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4530002
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Shiraz University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45300022015-08-12 The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation ENJOO, SEYED ALI AMINI, MITRA TABEI, SEYED ZIAADIN MAHBUDI, ALI KAVOSI, ZAHRA SABER, MAHBOOBEH J Adv Med Educ Prof Original Article INTRODUCTION: The application of organizational ethics in hospitals is one of the novel ways to improve medical ethics. Nowadays achieving efficient and sufficient ethical hospital indicators seems to be inevitable. In this connection, the present study aims to determine the best indicators in hospital accreditation. METHODS: 69 indicators in 11 fields to evaluate hospital ethics were achieved through a five-step qualitative and quantitative study including literature review, expert focus group, Likert scale survey, 3 rounded Delphi, and content validity measurement. Expert focus group meeting was conducted, employing Nominal Group Technique (NGT). After running NGT, a three rounded Delphi and parallel to Delphi and a Likert scale survey were performed to obtain objective indicators for each domain. The experts were all healthcare professionals who were also medical ethics researchers, teachers, or PhD students. Content validity measurements were computed, using the viewpoints of two different expert groups, some ethicists, and some health care professionals (n=46). RESULTS: After conducting NGT, Delphi, Likert survey, 11 main domains were listed including:  Informed consent, Medical confidentiality, Physician-patient economic relations, Ethics consultation policy in the hospital, Ethical charter of hospital, Breaking bad medical news protocol, Respect for the patients’ rights, Clinical ethics committee, Spiritual and palliative care unit programs in the hospitals, Healthcare professionals’ communication skills, and Equitable access to the healthcare. Also 71 objective indicators for these 11 domains were listed in 11 tables with 5 to 8 indicators per table. Content Validity Ratio (CVR) measurements were done and 69 indicators were highlighted. CONCLUSION: The domains listed in this study seem to be the most important ones for evaluating hospital ethics programs and services. Healthcare organizations’ accreditation and ranking are crucial for the improvement of healthcare services. Ethics programs would also motivate hospitals to improve their services and move towards patients’ satisfaction. In this regard, more involvement of bioethicists can help healthcare organizations to develop ethics programs and ensure ethics-based practice in hospitals. Shiraz University of Medical Sciences 2015-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4530002/ /pubmed/26269789 Text en © 2015: Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
ENJOO, SEYED ALI
AMINI, MITRA
TABEI, SEYED ZIAADIN
MAHBUDI, ALI
KAVOSI, ZAHRA
SABER, MAHBOOBEH
The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation
title The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation
title_full The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation
title_fullStr The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation
title_full_unstemmed The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation
title_short The main indicators for Iranian hospital ethical accreditation
title_sort main indicators for iranian hospital ethical accreditation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4530002/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26269789
work_keys_str_mv AT enjooseyedali themainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT aminimitra themainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT tabeiseyedziaadin themainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT mahbudiali themainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT kavosizahra themainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT sabermahboobeh themainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT enjooseyedali mainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT aminimitra mainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT tabeiseyedziaadin mainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT mahbudiali mainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT kavosizahra mainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation
AT sabermahboobeh mainindicatorsforiranianhospitalethicalaccreditation