It provides the evidence nurses need to convince their hospitals to seek this accreditation. This study compares the original magnet hospitals with ones that met criteria for accreditation as magnet hospitals by the American Nurses Credentialing Center. Subsequent research showed that ‘magnet hospitals’ have better outcomes than nonmagnet hospitals. In the 1980s, the American Academy of Nursing reported on hospitals that were able to recruit and retain highly qualified nurses in a competitive market. Our findings validate the ability of the Magnet Nursing Services Recognition Program to successfully identify hospitals that provide high-quality nursing care. ![]() ![]() We found that at ANCC-recognized magnet hospitals nurses had lower burnout rates and higher levels of job satisfaction and gave the quality of care provided at their hospitals higher ratings than did nurses at the AAN magnet hospitals. The purpose of the current study is to examine whether hospitals selected for recognition by the ANCC application process-ANCC-accredited hospitals-are as successful in creating environments in which excellent nursing care is provided as the original AAN magnet hospitals were. In the 1990s, the American Nurses Association (ANA), through the ANCC, established a formal program to acknowledge excellence in nursing services: the Magnet Nursing Services Recognition Program. Magnet designation, or recognition of the “best” hospitals, was conceived in the early 1980s when the American Academy of Nursing (AAN) conducted a study to identify which hospitals attracted and retained nurses and which organizational features were shared by these successful hospitals, referred to as magnet hospitals. Nursing’s best kept secret is the single most effective mechanism for providing that type of comparative information to consumers, a seal of approval for quality nursing care: designation of magnet hospital status by the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC). The AHA continues to work with CMS to advance improvements in the star rating program.In an environment rife with controversy about patient safety in hospitals, medical error rates, and nursing shortages, consumers need to know how good the care is at their local hospitals. The American Hospital Association (AHA) and others have challenged the methodology used and the choice of measures which are particularly harsh on both rural hospitals and those serving the most complex patients. The penalty is assessed based on a limited set of infection measures and a patient safety indicator derived from claims information. Although CMS has taken some corrective action, they have not addressed concerns regarding the appropriateness of the underlying approach.Īlong with the star ratings, CMS released a list of hospitals who perform in the lower quartile and will receive a HAC penalty in FY 2018. ![]() ![]() The star rating approach and methodology has raised considerable concerns and questions over the accuracy and validity of the process. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has updated its Hospital Compare website with new star ratings for hospitals across the country, including the release of a list of hospitals receiving Hospital-Acquired Condition (HAC) penalties for fiscal year 2018.ĬMS began to report hospital quality star ratings in July 2016 by combining over 50 measures into a single rating of one to five stars, with five stars being the top rating.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |