Wednesday 3 December 2014

Accreditation Canada: A False Sense of Security

Accreditation Canada:  A False Sense of Security
 
Having been in hospital management and leadership positions in both the United States and Canada, it is my experience that surveys by Accreditation Canada are considerably less than thorough; that they do not ensure that hospitals are committed to providing safe, quality healthcare; and that many hospitals in Canada would not pass the more rigid accreditation surveys conducted by The Joint Commission in the United States.

What is Accreditation Canada?

Accreditation Canada is an independent organization responsible for accrediting hospitals and other healthcare organizations across Canada.

As per Accreditation Canada, their accreditation is supposed to assure you that the accredited organizations are committed to the ongoing delivery of safe, quality healthcare; risk-reduction; and accountability.



How do they accomplish this?

Accreditation Canada completes a survey (assessment) of the organization and its operating practices during a pre-arranged time period of 2-5 days.

Accreditation occurs every 4 years.
 

What do they look at?

Accreditation primarily looks at the organization’s compliance with what are referred to as “Required Organizational Practices” (ROPs).  (http://www.accreditation.ca/sites/default/files/rop-handbook-2014-en.pdf )
 


Is Accreditation Canada the same as The Joint Commission that accredits hospitals in the United States?

The Joint Commission in the United States is also an independent organization responsible for accrediting hospitals and other healthcare organizations.

Besides jurisdiction, there are several important distinctions and differences.

-  Joint Commission surveys are unannounced.

-  Accreditation is for a three year period.

-  The number and detail of standards that are assessed.

-  The breadth and thoroughness of the survey.


How does The Joint Commission accomplish this?

The Joint Commission completes a rigorous and unannounced survey (assessment) of a wide range of standards.

The standards-based performance areas for hospitals are:

- Environment of Care

- Life Safety

- Provision of Care, Treatment, and Services

- Emergency Management

- Medication Management

- Record of Care, Treatment, and Services

- Human Resource

- Medical Staff

- Rights and Responsibilities of the Individual

- Infection Prevention and Control

- National Patient Safety Goals

- Transplant Safety

- Information Management

- Nursing

- Waived Testing

- Leadership

- Performance Improvement

Also examined are “Accountability Measures” (formerly “Core Measures”) - which are condition-based best practice measures.
 

Where does Accreditation Canada fall behind The Joint Commission?

-  Example:  Infection Control and Prevention

Accreditation Canada only looks at following:

- Hand Hygiene Compliance

- Hand Hygiene Education & Training

- Infection Rates – how the hospital tracks common infections (at the hospital’s discretion), reportable diseases, and antibiotic-resistant organisms – and what is done with that information

- Administration of the Pneumococcal vaccine to high-risk populations

- Reprocessing of medical equipment.

The Joint Commission surveyors would look at all the above, but also at:

-  The minutes of every Infection Control and Prevention (IPAC) Committee meeting for the survey period.

-  If and how IPAC Committee reviews all hospital policies and procedures.

-  If and how the IPAC Department in involved in the review of all equipment and supplies used in the hospital.

-  How the hospital ensures that it is following best-practices to prevent healthcare-associated infections – including, but not limited to, central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI), surgical site infections (SSI), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI).

-  Rates for healthcare-associated infections and strategies to address them.

-  Collaboration of the IPAC Department with Occupational Health to ensure employee health and safety – and strategies to prevent the spread of infections between patients and staff (or visa-versa).

-  Evaluation of the Occupational Health Department with respect to the employee immunization program, fit testing, etc.

-  If the IPAC Department has a seat on, and active role in, the Employee Safety Committee.

-  What strategies are in place to prevent the spread of multi-drug resistant organisms between patients, or to employees.

-  Collaboration between the IPAC Department and Emergency Preparedness to mitigate the risk to the hospital population from incidents involving potentially infectious agents.

-  If the IPAC Department has a seat on, and active role in, the “Environment of Care” Committee (U.S. term for the committee responsible for review of all safety concerns involving the physical facilities, and which conducts monthly surveys of the facility.)

-  Hand-on thorough examination of the reprocessing of reusable medical equipment in the central reprocessing area and any point-of-care reprocessing.

-  Special attention is paid to the reprocessing of endoscopes - a device with a camera (and sometimes instruments) to examine various internal body parts.

-  The process for hospital staff and physicians to report any Infection Control concerns – and how these are handled by the IPAC Department.

[Note:  This is a not an exhaustive list by any means.]

While a surveyor for Accreditation Canada could choose look at these additional items, they are not part of the ROPs and therefore have essentially no bearing on the accreditation process.


Examples of significant omissions in recent Accreditation Canada surveys in Ontario:

 
1)  Accreditation Canada completed a survey of a hospital in the Toronto area.

- Within a month, the local Public Health Department ordered the hospital to immediately cease using all endoscopes and cited serious breaches in reprocessing and storage (specifically related to scopes used for examining the digestive tract, colon, and respiratory tract).

-  The hospital was cited for breaches in the central reprocessing area, and for reprocessing done at the point-of-care.

-  How did Accreditation Canada miss that?!?

-  The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Ontario Ministry of Health both consider adherence to best practices in the reprocessing of endoscopes so importance that they created separate and specific guidelines to address it – yet Accreditation Canada does not mention it in their ROPs – nor apparently is it part of their surveys.

-  An out-patient centre in Ottawa was also cited by Ottawa Public Health the previous year.  This received extensive coverage in the news – so it should have been fresh in the minds of the Accreditation Canada surveyors at this Toronto area hospital.

(- This should make you wonder what else Accreditation Canada will miss when they survey your local hospital.)
 

2)  Elsewhere in Ontario, Accreditation Canada completed a hospital survey and failed to note that bedpans and commode buckets were being washed/reprocessed in soiled utility rooms at the point-of-care, and without employees being provided or wearing proper personal protective equipment (PPE).

-  Best practices for reprocessing of equipment that involves the potential for aerosolization of blood, body fluids or other potentially infectious material – state that the employee should wear appropriate gloves, full face protection, and an impermeable gown or waterproof apron.  Gloves must be long enough to cover their wrists and forearms, and the rest of their arms also need to be covered by PPE.

-  Reusable bedpans and commode buckets should be reprocessed in a central reprocessing area.  (Disposable liners are available for bedpans and commode buckets – so they do not have to be reprocessed with each use for the same patient.)
 

3)  Why does Accreditation Canada not look at if and how the hospital ensures that it is following best-practices to prevent healthcare-associated infections – including, but not limited to, central line-associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI), surgical site infections (SSI), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), and catheter-associated urinary tract infections (CAUTI)?

-  Why are Safer Healthcare Now! best practices not listed as “Reference Material” anywhere in the ROPs?

-  This topic was discussed at length in the first post on this blog.


4)  Accreditation Canada fails to review the reprocessing procedures for commode chairs (as discussed in the December 02, 2014 post on this blog) – and the storage of clean commode chairs in soiled utility rooms – as these breaches occur in numerous hospitals.
 

5)  I have seen Accreditation Canada surveyors walk under damaged and water-stained ceiling tiles without noticing.

-  Water damage has been linked to the spread of infection in healthcare settings.

-  Hospitals should not only be replacing the tiles – but addressing the problem that caused the damage.

-  Accreditation Canada should be noticing these tiles.

-  Accreditation Canada should be asking hospitals what their process is for assessing for and dealing with this and other types of water damage.
 
-  Hospitals in Canada need to adopt the “Environment of Care” committees used it hospitals in the United States and surveyed by the Joint Commission – and Accreditation Canada needs to ensure that hospitals examine issues that would be looked at by an “Environment of Care” committee (whether the hospital chooses to create one by that name  or not).


6)  Accreditation Canada ROPs requires at least two patient identifiers before providing any service or procedure – yet some hospitals have not changed the default setting on a commonly used ECG machine which only asks for the patient’s name and age as patient identifiers.  Age is not an acceptable patient-specific identifier.  Date-of-birth is.  (I recall working in an Emergency Department and having two patients who had the same name and were both born less than 12 months apart – so they would be the same age for part of the year.)  Accreditation Canada has failed to notice this.
 
-  Even though most ECG machines ask for the patient’s name and medical record number, it is important to enter the date of birth in case the name is misspelled or the medical number is entered incorrectly (which occurs often).
 
-  Some hospitals put a patient label or stamp the ECG with this information, but it should be entered into the machine in case a label or stamp is not applied (which also happens).

7)  The Ontario Ministry of Health PIDAC best practice guidelines (and those of other provinces) have specific requirements for soiled utility room and clean equipment/supply rooms.

- Hospitals frequently have clean supplies or equipment stored in soiled utility rooms.

-  Items are stored in cupboards under sinks (in clean or soilded utility rooms).

-  Clean supplies are placed on the floor in supply rooms.  (Even boxes/cases need to be stored off the floor).

-  These are common problems in hospitals, yet Accreditation Canada fails to notice.
 

8)  Accreditation Canada does not randomly audit, nor do they ensure that hospitals audit, compliance with the “Do Not Use List” of dangerous abbreviations as per their own ROP on the issue.

-  The Institute for Safe Medication Practices – Canada (ISMP – Canada) publishes the list of Dangerous Abbreviations.

-  Many nurses, physicians, and allied health professionals routinely use dangerous abbreviations in their orders and documentation.

-  [More on the ISMP Canada’s Dangerous Abbreviations list in a later blog post.]
 

9)  Some hospitals do not have a policy, nor make it a practice to disinfect equipment before it is sent to the Maintenance Department or Biomedical Engineering for repairs – thus contaminating those areas and placing those employees at risk.  Accreditation Canada does not look at this.
 

10)   All of the issues mentioned in the previous two blog posts on this blog routinely go unnoticed by Accreditation Canada.


 

Where do we go from here?
 

1)  Accreditation Canada surveys need to be unannounced.

-  Since hospitals know in advance when the survey occurs, they coach their staff, paint the walls, and effectively manage to temporarily change and/or hide many of the aforementioned issues from the surveyors – yet these problems go unaddressed for the remainder of the 4 year period in-between accreditation visits.

-  Some of the aforementioned problems (and many others) would be noticed by Accreditation Canada if the surveys were unannounced.

-  [Sidebar:  Sadly, here in Ontario Public Health Department inspections (i.e. commercial kitchens, Day Care centres, etc.) and Fire Marshall inspections are also pre-scheduled.]

-  How can an Accreditation Canada survey (or any other inspection) be an accurate reflection of the safe operating practices of an organization if that organization knows in advance when to hide their poor practices?

-  In the United States, hospitals remain “Accreditation Ready” at all times – as they do not know when The Joint Commission will walk through the door.
 

2)  I can already hear the calls of “We are not the United States”.

-  Correct, we are not.   But that should not be an excuse of why we can be less diligent, but rather why we should strive to be even better.  Look at The Joint Commission standards and rigorous surveys as something to aspire to – and then exceed!
 

3)  Perhaps there needs to be the opportunity (or requirement) for surveyors (and staff) at Accreditation Canada to accompany Joint Commission surveyors on a survey.
 

4)  Accreditation Canada needs to take more control over the accreditation process and surveys – as hospitals are very skilled at steering the process in the direction they want to go, and away from their failures.
 
 

What can we do?

-  Write or e-mail Accreditation Canada and discuss the concerns mentioned in this blog post.

-  Write or e-mail your Member or Parliament (MP). Member of Provincial Parliament (MPP), and the federal and provincial Ministers of Health and discuss the concerns mentioned in this blog post.

- Hospitals that are deficient in any of the areas mentioned in this blog post need to address them - despite not being cited by Accreditation Canada.

 

Links:

Accreditation Canada - http://www.accreditation.ca/
Accreditation Canada ROPs - http://www.accreditation.ca/sites/default/files/rop-handbook-2014-en.pdf

The Joint Commission - http://www.jointcommission.org/
The Joint Commission’s National Patient Safety Goals - http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/6/2015_NPSG_HAP.pdf
The Joint Commission’s Accountability Measures - http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/ACCOUNTABILITY_MEASURES_List_2014.pdf
The Joint Commission’s “Central Line-Associated Bloodstream Infection Toolkit and Monograph” - http://www.jointcommission.org/Topics/Clabsi_toolkit.aspx and
http://www.jointcommission.org/assets/1/18/CLABSI_Monograph.pdf

Government of Ontario - Provincial Infectious Disease Advisory Committee (PIDAC):  http://www.publichealthontario.ca/en/BrowseByTopic/InfectiousDiseases/PIDAC/Pages/PIDAC_Documents.aspx  (Best Practice Documents.)

Public Health Agency of Canada’s “Routine Practices and Additional Precautions for Preventing the Transmission of Infection in Healthcare Settings” - http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2013/aspc-phac/HP40-83-2013-eng.pdf and
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/nois-sinp/guide/summary-sommaire/tihs-tims-eng.php

Institute for Safe Medication Practices – Canada (ISMP – Canada) - http://www.ismp-canada.org/index.htm
ISMP- Canada’s Dangerous Abbreviations list - http://www.ismp-canada.org/download/ISMPCanadaListOfDangerousAbbreviations.pdf





No comments:

Post a Comment