IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The public disclosure of accreditation information in Australia: Stakeholder perceptions of opportunities and challenges

Listed author(s):
  • Greenfield, David
  • Hinchcliff, Reece
  • Pawsey, Marjorie
  • Westbrook, Johanna
  • Braithwaite, Jeffrey
Registered author(s):

    Public disclosure is increasingly a requirement of accrediting agencies and governments. There are few published empirical evaluations of disclosure interventions that inform evidence-based implementation or policy. This study investigated the practices associated with the public disclosure of healthcare accreditation information, in addition to multi-stakeholder perceptions of key challenges and opportunities for improvement. We conducted a mixed methods study comprising analysis of disclosure practices by accreditation agencies, and 47 semi-structured individual or group interviews involving 258 people. Participants were diverse stakeholders associated with Australian primary, acute and residential aged care accreditation programmes. Four interrelated issues were identified. First, there was broad agreement that accreditation information should be publicly disclosed, although the three accreditation agencies differed in the information they made public. Second, two implementation issues emerged: the need to educate the community about accreditation information, and the practical question of the detail to be provided. Third, the impact, both positive and negative, of disclosing accreditation information was raised. Fourth, the lack of knowledge about the impact on consumers was discussed. Public disclosure of accreditation information is an idea that has widespread support. However, translating the idea into practice, so as to produce appropriate, meaningful information, is a challenge.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851013002273
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Health Policy.

    Volume (Year): 113 (2013)
    Issue (Month): 1 ()
    Pages: 151-159

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:113:y:2013:i:1:p:151-159
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.09.002
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as
    in new window


    1. repec:mpr:mprres:5089 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Bentur, Netta & Resnitzky, Shirli & Sterne, Abram, 2010. "Attitudes of stakeholders and policymakers in the healthcare system towards the provision of spiritual care in Israel," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 13-19, June.
    3. Dana B. Mukamel & William D. Spector & Jacqueline S. Zinn & Lynn Huang & David L. Weimer & Ann Dozier, 2007. "Nursing Homes' Response to the Nursing Home Compare Report Card," Journals of Gerontology: Series B, Gerontological Society of America, vol. 62(4), pages 218-225.
    4. Jeongyoung Park & Rachel M. Werner, 2011. "Changes in the relationship between nursing home financial performance and quality of care under public reporting," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(7), pages 783-801, July.
    5. repec:mpr:mprres:5454 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:113:y:2013:i:1:p:151-159. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    or ()

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.