Dear accreditation professional,
Your feedback is essential to us at HCPro. Please take just a few minutes to share your thoughts with us regarding ongoing and new challenges faced by you and your accreditation colleagues. In gratitude for your participation, you also have a chance to win $50 off any product in the HCPro Marketplace. Simply click on the link below to begin the survey. If the click-through does not work, please cut and paste the URL below into the address bar of your browser.
Here’s the link to the survey:
All your answers are confidential and anonymous. If you have questions related to this survey, please contact me at the email below. The deadline to fill out the survey is May 30, 2016.
Associate Product Manager
When: 1:00–2:30 p.m. EST, Wednesday, February 24, 2016
What: CMS has increased the frequency of its hospital surveys, and many healthcare facilities are finding themselves unprepared for the bump in federal scrutiny. This webcast will arm attendees with the preparatory steps and strategies needed to survive a CMS survey. Attendees will also examine a real-life case study for specific examples of survey citations and how to respond to them.
- Utilize a compliance plan to develop an organization-specific, comprehensive approach to accreditation and compliance readiness
- Identify at least three sources of information to review changes in the Conditions of Participation/survey process
- Implement a gap analysis of your organization’s compliance readiness
Who: Victoria Fennel, PhD, RN-BC, CPHQ, is the director of accreditation and clinical compliance for Compass Clinical Consulting and has 20 years of healthcare leadership experience. She has spent the majority of her career in nursing leadership roles and brings expertise in evidence-based practice, nursing education, quality management, performance improvement, accreditation, risk management, patient safety, and patient-centered care.
Julie Campbell, MHA, BSN, NE-BC, HACP, is the Baylor Scott & White Health North Texas Division vice president and has than 25 years of nursing leadership experience. Campbell assists in survey preparation, development of corporate policies and procedures, communications on revisions to regulations/standards, and recommendations of regulatory changes to various system councils to maintain continuous readiness.
CMS is asking Medicare patients or their family members to help them develop a new patient-satisfaction survey of long-term, acute-care facilities. The comments will help CMS decide what sorts of information the survey will need to collect. Some of the suggested topics areas include:
• Communication with providers
• Mechanical ventilation
• Therapy services
• Wound care
• Pain management/control or non-pain symptom management
• Rehabilitation services
• Medical and nursing care
• Interdisciplinary team goal setting and care planning
• Family training
• Discharge planning
The survey will also be used in Medicare’s quality reporting program, meaning facilities that fail to deliver data could get a 2% reduction in their payment updates. CMS is accepting comments until 5 p.m. on Jan. 19.
The Joint Commission seeks comments from healthcare facilities about a proposed standard that would require organizations to establish antimicrobial stewardship programs. The purpose of the new standard is to decrease the use of antimicrobials whenever possible to prevent the creation of drug-resistant strains of disease.
The deadline to provide feedback via comments or completing a survey is December 30.
Editor’s note: My colleague Steve MacArthur, an expert on accreditation standards related to hospital safety, emergency management, and life safety, recently wrote an excellent article about the changing accreditation regulations and I wanted to share it with you.
Over time, I’ve developed certain thoughts relative to the management of the survey process, one of which relates to the ever-changing (maybe evolution, maybe mutation) regulatory survey process and I think it boils down to a couple of basic expectation (at least on my part):
- You always run the risk of having a surveyor disagree with any (and every) decision you’ve ever made relative to the operational management of risk, particularly as a function of standards-based compliance.
- Your (or indeed any) Authority Having Jurisdiction always reserves the right to disagree with anything they, or anyone else, has ever told you was “okay” to put into place (and this includes plan review for new or renovated spaces)
Recent survey experiences are littered with the remains of practices and conditions that were never cited in the past, but in the latest go-round have become representative of a substandard approach to managing whatever risk might be in question. For example, just consider how the survey of the surgical environment has changed (and changed very rapidly, if you ask me) from what was typically a fairly non-impactful experience (there were any number of instances in which the Life Safety surveyor didn’t even dress out to go into the OR proper) to the area generating the top three most frequently cited standards during The Joint Commission surveys in 2014. That, my friends, is a whole lot of schwing in the survey process.
Continue reading the article at Mac’s Safety Space.