| Summary: | 碩士 === 亞洲大學 === 健康管理研究所 === 97 === The purpose of this study is to compare the past and current hospital accreditation in Taiwan and JCI in regards of difficulties introduced by differences in policy, operation and consequences. This research serves a valuable reference in administering medical evaluation and helps to understand accreditation practices and evaluation goals. The purpose of this study is to analyze the past and current hospital accreditation in Taiwan and foreign countries in regards of difficulties introduced by differences in policy, operation and consequences.The study was carried out through in-depth face-to-face interviews and the interviewees include vice president, medical director, nursing supervisor, management supervisor and personnel in charged of accreditation from 3 medical centers, 10 regional hospitals and 10 district hospitals. Overall, there are 55 participants (with 8 of them participated in JCI before).The result shows that both legacy system and JCI accreditation are different from the new assessment in such that standards and physical evidences are required. The differences can also be found in assessment pre-procedure, member selection, evaluation charge, result classification, ranking and etc,. The result shows that majority of the interviewees agree in simplifying classification, self-assessment and government should allocate national health insurance budget in accords to the results. Opinions also reveal the fact that assessment standards are beneficial in advancing our medical care system. Nevertheless, accreditation in Taiwan can further be improved by referencing JCI in aspect of patient-centered design. Therefore, government should enforce impartial standards and motivate accreditation in promoting a better medical quality.
|
|---|
