Category Archives: JCI Standards MCI

JCI Standard MCI.1 – Communication with the Community

Posted on by
Reply

It is natural to think of the Public Relations (PR) department of a hospital when a hospital needs to deal with a community it serves to facilitate access to care and access to information about its patient care services. Thus, it is not surprising to pass the buck to a representative of the PR department of a hospital sitting in a Management Of Communication And Information (MCI) Committee to deal with, and in order to comply with the Joint Commission International (JCI) Standard MCI.1 which states “The organization communicates with its community to facilitate access to care and access to information about its patient care services.”

I think if you are a leader championing the JCI MCI standards, this leader must not merely delegate this MCI standard to the PR department representative to deal with, but must also nurture as teacher, mentor, colleague, and friend to guide and be responsible to coach in the implementation and compliance of this standard, thus to care for and encourage the growth or development of MCI standards for the hospital. In this scenario, it is important for this leader to be knowledgeable in PR by at least researching the subject matter and linking his or her literature reviews with this standard.

From my interactions with representatives of PR department of hospitals, they normally deal with the management of both internal and external communications. They told me they are responsible for promotions of the hospital and implementation of the hospital’s marketing programmes that are related to overall mission and vision of the hospital, also manage and improve the flow of information within the hospital and between the hospital and the community it serves. Public relations professionals also serve as liaisons to the community and work closely with other health partners in the locality in preventive health. The responsibilities of a PR person in a hospital setting includes writing and distributing news release, feature articles to the press, compiling press list, witting of newsletters, handling and maintaining a media information service, arranging press, radio and television interviews for management, preparing marketing plans for various programmes and create strategies in promotional and marketing efforts. In summary, the PR department is responsible for community relations, hospital publications, media relations special events and support for fundraising.

Since the measurable elements for this standard requires a hospital to (i) implement  a communication strategy, (ii) provide information on its services, hours of operation, and the process to obtain care through mass media interventions, such as those delivered by leaflets, booklets, posters, billboards, newspapers, radio and television, and (iii) provide information on the quality of its services, “the quality of services as is always determined by certain attributes that they have or should have. The most important attributes health services should have, are accessibility and availability,usage facility, public’s acceptance and all these always in relation to their cost.” (Athina and Andriani, 2012, p. 205) which is provided to the public and to referral sources with defined communities  and populations of interest,  I personally think that the PR department in a hospital is best suited to manage and measure this standard based on what I have already said in the preceding paragraph.

With all what I wrote above and what I intend to say in the next paragraph, let me remind you that all of us serving in the socioeconomic system of healthcare, including doctors and patients carry on our lives as person-systems within a hierarchy of multiple and overlapping systems of family, community and wider society. The internal needs of patients as person-systems, i.e. the patient is unwell, the patient’s family, workmates, employers and hospitals will tend to accept the sick role of this patient. After a defined length of time, the patient seeks the professional endorsement of a doctor for a clinical transaction, which is a subsystem of the hierarchy of systems comprising health care.  At the end of the day, the person-systems of doctor and patient constituting of the patient, members of family, community systems and professional (e.g. the doctor) or economic systems, all support a speedy and complete return to health for the patient.

Members of the MCI Committee must be aware that the approach it chooses in understanding and measuring as well as complying with this standard, is driven by the care delivery for the population served by the hospital in advising patients on how to leverage the system to ensure coordination of care across the continuum, integrated across the continuum among defined communities and populations of interest with healthcare specialists in the hospital.

So what is this “defined communities and populations of interest”,  if you are a member of  a  MCI Committee, you need to focus on?

Marie and Sandra (2011, pp. 46-47) define population of interest as “a population at risk or those with a common risk factor leading to the threat of a particular health issue. It also may be defined as a population of interest known as a healthy population who may in fact improve their health by making certain choices that will further promote health and/or protect against disease or injury. For example, an adolescent population that engages in alternative sports and chooses to wear protective gear avoids serious injury.”

I have been asked how and what does the PR department do in order to understand patterns and trends within this population of interest. First, I think it is the best interest of the PR department to be comfortable enough with information technology to collect and organise data, initiate and develop appropriate databases for their practice to better assess and serve the population of interest. I also think the PR department must design cross-sectional studies at finding out the prevalence of a phenomenon, problem, attitude or issue by taking a snap-shot or cross-section of the population. Pre-test/post-test studies could also be undertaken to measure the efficacy of a program on the same population to determine if a change has occurred.

I have also been asked how and what does the PR department do when identifying defined communities. My advice is that the PR department must be involved in gathering census data that provide the PR department with evidence about the overall health status of the population living in a particular community. The PR department could use the Internet which provides a wealth of data such as geography and history of a community as well as census track boundaries and data.

Armed with knowledge on defined communities  and populations of interest, the PR department  must surely be able to show evidence that there is (i) a communication strategy to reach the defined communities  and populations of interest , (ii) information on its services, hours of operation, and the process to obtain care, and (iii) information on the quality of its services, which is provided to the public and to referral sources with defined communities  and populations of interest, in order to fully comply with Standard MCI.1.

All this is possible when the hospital and the PR department jointly develop and revise strategic and operational plans to address community needs for a healthier community within larger geographic or political areas as reflected in the hospital’s mission and required by the JCI Standard GLD.3.1 which states that “Organization leaders plan with community leaders and leaders of other organizations to meet the community’s health care needs.”, thus recognising that they have responsibility for and can achieve an impact on the community.

References:

  1. Athina, L & Andriani, D, 2012, Quality assurance in healthcare service delivery, nursing, and personalized medicine: technologies and processes, Medical Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA, USA
  2. Joint Commission International, 2010, Joint Commission International Accreditation Standards For Hospitals, 4th edn, JCI, USA
  3. Kingsley, N & Sam, S 2009, Problems With Patients: Managing Complicated Transactions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
  4. Louise, LI & Carolyn, LB 2008, Public Health Nursing: Leadership, Policy & Practice, Delmar Cengage Learning, New York, USA  
  5. Marie, TL & Sandra, BL (eds.) 2011, Public health nursing : practicing population-based care, Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA, USA
  6. Stephan, J & Frank,  MG 2011,  Information and Communication Technologies in Healthcare, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA

JCI Standard MCI.20.2 – Using or participating in external databases

Posted on by
Reply

In order to compare its performance and to identify opportunities for improvement, a Hospital needs a mechanism for comparing its performance to that of other similar hospitals locally, nationally, and internationally with recognised, internationally accepted standards.

The mechanism must be designed to transform input forces and movement by (i) operate or interact by participating in external performance databases, (ii) compare its performance to that of other similar hospitals,  into a desired set of output forces and movement when the hospital can identify opportunities for improvement and hence documenting its performance level.

This arrangement of connected parts in a system of parts of individual hospital performances like those parts of a machine is surely an effective tool to demonstrate the quality and safety that are being provided in the hospital and can be thought of as benchmarks of success when the hospital participates through reference databases.

I can think of the following initiatives in the US when hospitals as providers participate through reference databases to improve by benchmarking their performance against others, encourage private insurers and public programs to reward quality and efficiency, and help patients make informed choices:

  1. Hospital Compare which encourages hospitals to improve the quality of care they provide and for patients to find hospitals and compare the quality of their care  and make decisions about which hospital will best meet their health care needs;
  2. Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) – a private, mostly not-for-profit contractor of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) to improve the quality of health care for all Medicare beneficiaries;
  3. ORYX® data reported on The Joint Commission website at Quality Check® which permits user comparisons of hospital performance at the state and national levels; and
  4. hospitals complete The Leapfrog Hospital Survey, the gold standard for comparing hospitals’ performance on the national standards of safety, quality, and efficiency

In all instances, hospitals need to check if they are required by local laws or regulations to contribute to some external databases. Hospitals also need to maintain security and confidentiality of data and information at all times when operating or interacting with external databases.

ff your hospital is a hospital which is already JCI accredited or seeking JCI accreditation status or undergoing re-survey for JCI accreditation status, then the JCI Standard MCI.20.2 requires it to have a mechanism in place with the following characteristics:

  1. there is a process to participate in or to use information from external databases, thus satisfying the JCI Standard QPS.4.2, ME 2 which states that “Comparisons are made with similar organizations when possible.”;
  2. the hospital contributes data or information to external databases in accordance with laws or regulations, thus satisfying for example both the JCI Standard PCI.10.4, ME 1 which states that “Health care–associated infection rates are compared to other organizations’ rates through comparative databases.” and the JCI Standard QPS.4.2, ME 2; and
  3. the hospital compares its performance using external reference databases, also satisfying the JCI Standard QPS.4.2, ME 2; and the hospital maintains security and confidentiality when contributing to or using external databases.

References:

  1. Facts about ORYX® for Hospitals (National Hospital Quality Measures), The Joint Commission, viewed 8 March 2013, < http://www.jointcommission.org/facts_about_oryx_for_hospitals/ >
  2. Joint Commission International, 2010, Joint Commission International Accreditation Standards For Hospitals, 4th edn, JCI, USA
  3. Prathibha, V (ed.) 2010, Medical quality management : theory and practice, 2nd edn,  Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA, USA
  4. Quality Improvement Organizations, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, viewed 6 March 2013, < http://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Quality-Initiatives-Patient-Assessment-Instruments/QualityImprovementOrgs/index.html?redirect=/qualityimprovementorgs >
  5. Welcome to the Leapfrog Hospital Survey, The Leapfroggroup, viewed 8 March 2013, < https://leapfroghospitalsurvey.org/ >

8 ways for identifying opportunities for improvement and documenting a hospital’s performance level

Posted on by
Reply

8-ways-for-identifying-opportunities-for--improvement-and--documenting-a-hospital’s--performance-level-2

References:
Joint Commission International 2010, Joint Commission International Accreditation Standards For Hospitals, 4th edn, JCI, USA

A hospital’s performance improvement activities as opportunities for improvement

Posted on by
Reply

syringe-with-MCI.20.1-PI-activitiesIn three previous posts, I brought to you how aggregate data are an important part of the hospital’s performance improvement activities. In particular, the three posts were about aggregate data from risk management, utility system management, infection prevention and control, and utilisation review and how they can help the hospital understand its current performance and identify opportunities for improvement.

The posts were:

(i)                  JCI Standard MCI.20.1, ME 1 (Part 1) – risk management, in “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs.” ;

(ii)                JCI Standard MCI.20.1, ME 1 (Part 2) – infection prevention and control, in “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs.” ;

and

(iii)             JCI Standard MCI.20.1, ME 1 (Part 3) – utility system management and utilisation review, in “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs.”

Each of the links above will open in a new separate tab of your current browser window.

In this review of those 3 posts, I like to emphasise that a hospital chooses which clinical and managerial processes and outcomes are most important to monitor based on its mission patient needs and services provided. The hospital’s leaders must identify key measures (indicators) to monitor the hospitals’s clinical and managerial structures, processes and outcomes.

A required clinical monitoring which includes structure, process or outcomes data selected by the leaders is on aspects of infection control, surveillance and reporting. For managerial monitoring, a required managerial monitoring which includes structure, process or outcomes data selected by the leaders is on aspects of risk management and utilisation review/management.

The hospital collects and analyses aggregate data from clinical monitoring and managerial monitoring to support patient care and organisation management. Aggregate data provides a profile of the hospital over time and allows the comparison of the hospitals’s performance with other hospitals.

To measure the hospital’s performance improvement activities, hospitals usually prepare a master plan to reduce evident risks in the environment or individual plans which incorporates a comprehensive program and plan inclusive of :

  1. a program and plan to reduce the risk of health care-associated infections in patients, health care workers and visitors
  2. a program and plan that includes utility systems – electric, water and other utility systems,  maintained to minimise risk of failure

There is also a written plan for an organisation-wide quality improvement and patient safety program that includes clinical and managerial processes for risk management, utility system management, infection prevention and control, and utilisation review.

References:
Joint Commission International 2010, Joint Commission International Accreditation Standards For Hospitals, 4th edn, JCI, USA

JCI Standard MCI.20.1, ME 1 (Part 3) – utility system management and utilisation review, in “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs.”

Posted on by
Reply

Well, I am not yet quiet finished on trying to tell you all about the Joint Commission International (JCI) Standard MCI.20.1. In this post I wish to share on the what, why and how about utility system management and utilisation review, the remaining two other important parts of the improvement activities of a hospital by which the hospital attempts to aggregate data to provide a profile of the hospital over time which then will allow the comparison of the hospital’s performance with other hospitals. Utility system management and utilisation review are the last of the four improvement activities of a hospital identified in the intent statement of the JCI Standard MCI.20.1.

My intent is to discuss in this post:

  1. in brief about utility system management and utilisation, as this single post cannot cover all about utility system management and utilisation review; and
  2. more importantly to highlight to management and hospital leaders when one is entrusted to champion the course of all the JCI Management of Communication and Information (MCI) standards, the probability when a hospital which is already JCI accredited or seeking JCI accreditation status or undergoing re-survey for JCI accreditation status, is expected to present the case of a process for both utility system management and utilisation review, when surveyors examine evidence under JCI Standard MCI.20.1 ME 1 the process to aggregate data from utility system management and utilisation review at a hospital in response to identified user needs  – in order to satisfy the requirement for the Measurable Element 1 of MCI.20.1 which states that “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs”.

Before I go on, my intent (ii) above is true for aggregate data from risk management as well as for infection prevention and control as  I have posted in JCI Standard MCI.20.1, ME 1 (Part 1) – risk management, in “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs.” and in JCI Standard MCI.20.1, ME 1 (Part 2) – infection prevention and control, in “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs.” respectively (each of these links will open in a new tab of your current browser window).

Medical insurance in Malaysia, provided by insurance companies and banks which provide a few plans for anyone to choose from based on own budget and needs, functions as a form of protection to cover unforeseen expenses arising from illness, injury or accidents – which can be very expensive, especially if hospitalisation and / or surgery is required.

Malaysian readers will already be aware that insurance companies in Malaysia provide coverage plans for medical services for their clients at any hospital. Malaysian readers will also be aware that health insurance companies in Malaysia request medical reports for approval of claims to confirm that any insurance plan provides for the coverage of medical services rendered.  While this is true for Malaysia, I have never known the need for utilisation review to review a request for medical treatment in Malaysia.

Let us now assume that utilisation review by insurance companies is practised in your settings and take this discussion from there.

Utilisation review refers to reviews of past medical treatment, for example in the United States where insurance companies perform an utilisation review to review a request for medical treatment. I have below a cropped infographic which provides the anatomy of health insurance coverage in the U.S. (click the infographic which will open in a new tab of your current window for a larger view).

health-insurance infographic croppedThe purpose of the review is to confirm that the plan provides coverage for a patient’s medical services typically found on an insurance policy’s precertification list.  The utilisation review also help an insurance company minimise costs and determine if the recommended treatment is appropriate. The company could deny coverage as a result of a utilisation review.

What about care based on medical necessity in the future, for example for approval for additional treatments while you’re undergoing medical care (a concurrent review)?

Utilisation management is the process of preauthorisation for medical service as it refers to requests for approval of future medical needs, and this term is often used interchangeably with utilisation review since both utilisation review and utilisation management involve the review of care based on a medical necessity.

Thus, the term “utilization review” refers to a retrospective review – the review of treatments or services that have already been administered, and involves the review of medical records in comparison with treatment guidelines. The insurance company uses the results to approve or deny coverage a patient has already received, and the information can also be used in a review of the insurance company’s coverage guidelines and criteria for a particular condition. The insurance company looks through a patient’s medical records for evidence of appropriate low-cost health care. It then compares this patient’s medical records to those of other patients with the same condition. It will then review, and possibly revise, its treatment guidelines and criteria to ensure that the provided care is adequate, and medically current, for the condition.

Therefore, hospitals get actively drawn into the process of the collection of information, including the symptoms, diagnosis, results of any lab tests and list of required services by providing clinical documentation that supports their treatment decisions.

I think Health Information Management (HIM) / Medical Records (MR) practitioners have a clear role in utilisation review if their setting is appropriate. HIM /MR practitioners will need to be aware (i) of the existence of an utilisation review policy and the relevant processes, and (ii) to contribute to good records keeping since a high retrieval rate of medical records can be expected when patients’ medical records are examined for evidence of appropriate low-cost health care and for comparison of treatment among other patients’ medical records for a similar condition, by the insurance companies.

I think to round-up the discussion on utlisation review, it is safe to justify then if a hospital –  which is already JCI accredited or seeking JCI accreditation status or undergoing re-survey for JCI accreditation status, satisfies the requirement for the Measurable Element 1 of MCI.20.1 which states that “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs”, if the hospital can provide evidence of documentation of a process to aggregate data i.e. in response to the identified user needs when data is aggregated for utilisation review.

Now, allow me to move forward to present utility system management.

Hospitals have different medical equipment and utility system needs based on their mission, patient needs, and resources. Regardless of the type of system and level of its resources, a hospital needs to protect patients and staff in emergencies, such as system failure, interruption, or contamination. The safe, effective, and efficient operation of utility and other key systems in the hospital is essential for patient, family, staff, and visitor safety and for meeting patient care needs.

The business of utility system management in a hospital is about:

  1. a constant potable water and electrical power supply
    1. first identifying  the areas and services at greatest risk when power fails or water is contaminated or interrupted, secondly to reduce the risks of such events and thus ensuring an uninterrupted (24-hour basis, every day of the week) source of clean water and electrical power, and when necessary regular and alternative sources of power and water must be identified that can be sourced in emergencies
    2. emergency processes to protect hospital occupants in the event of water or electrical system disruption, contamination, or failure
    3. testing its emergency water and electrical systems on a regular basis appropriate to the system and the results documented
  2. regular inspection and maintainance of electrical (example, frayed electrical lines), water, waste (example, waste contamination in food-preparation areas), ventilation  (example, inadequate ventilation in the clinical laboratory), medical gas  (example, oxygen cylinders that are not secured when stored, or leaking oxygen lines, and other key systems that all pose hazards and when appropriate, they must be improved
  3. designated individuals or authorities monitor regularly the quality of water received from a source, and the water used in chronic renal dialysis
  4. collection of monitoring data for the utility system management program
    1. monitoring essential systems helps the hospital prevent problems
    2. monitoring data that are collected and documented are used to plan the hospital’s long-term needs on system improvements and in planning for upgrading or replacing utility systems

It is almost to the end of this rather long post.

I think it is also safe to justify from the foregoing discussion on utility system management that when a hospital – which is already JCI accredited or seeking JCI accreditation status or undergoing re-survey for JCI accreditation status, satisfies the requirement for the Measurable Element 1 of MCI.20.1 which states that “The organization has a process to aggregate data in response to identified user needs”, if the hospital can provide evidence of documentation of a process to aggregate data i.e. in response to the identified user needs, when data is aggregated for utility system management.

This post ends what I wish to share all about the JCI Standard MCI.20.1, ME 1.

References:
Barbara JY 2011, Principles of risk management and patient safety, Jones & Bartlett Learning, Sudbury, MA, USA

Diane, LK 2007, Applying quality management in healthcare : a systems approach, 2nd edn, Health Administration Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA

Joint Commission International 2010, Joint Commission International Accreditation Standards For Hospitals, 4th edn, JCI, USA

Prathibha, V (ed.) 2010, Medical quality management : theory and practice, 2nd edn,  Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA, USA