不同时期医院评审办法许可期限定制的内容比较与评价

Contents comparison and evaluation on hospitals' screening method and license deadline made in different periods

[目的]比较不同时期医院等级评审办法许可期限的内容规定,探讨医院评审政策存在的问题与改进措施。[方法]采用内容比较研究方法,对1989-2011年4个国家级医院评审办法中涉及时间限制的内容进行比较。[结果]1989版《办法》中未明确提及的时限指标占比较研究总指标数的80%,1995版、2011版、2012版《办法》该比例分别为50%、5%、10%,时限最长的为评审周期,即等级证书有效期,时限为4年;最短的为评审申请、受理通知评审、评审报告完成、异议听证申请、整改再审申请等5个指标,时限均为5个工作日。[结论]2012年版《办法》对评审全程工作的时限做出明确规定,对卫生行政机关和评审组织的工作及其工作效率要求更加明确、严格,对使医疗机构参与等级评审的工作程序更显科学、规范;明确4年为一个评审周期,更有利于医院的科学管理和可持续发展;规定申请评审前不少于6个月自评,是评审方针在评审工作过程中的具体体现;但过于苛刻的时间限制未必能达到使评审工作更加务实高效的预期;进一步完善个别条款的时限规定将更有助于提升《办法》的权威性。

Objective To compare the license deadline contents of hospitals’ grade screening method in different periods, explore the policy problems and improvement measures. Methods Compared the contents involved time limits of four national hospital accreditations from 1989 to 2011 by content comparative study method. Results Time-bound index of unmentioned in 1989“Screening Methods”was up 80%of the total index. The proportion of 1995, 2011, 2012“Screening Methods”was 50%, 5%and 10%respectively. The maximum time limit was the review cycle, that was grading certificates, and time limit was four years. The minimum was the applications of accreditation, acceptance notification accreditation, to complete accreditation report, rectification and re-apply, etc., timeline was five working days. Conclusions New “Screening Methods” of 2012 clearly established that it should be further definite, strict to health administrative agencies and accreditation organization ＆#39;s working. It makes medical institutions involved in the grade accreditation of work procedures should be more scientific and standardized. The accreditation cycle is four years. It needs six-months self-rating at least before applying for accreditation. But, too harsh time limit can not play the function of efficient and pragmatic expectations. Further improve the individual provisions of the time limit will be more help to improve the authority of“Screening Methods”.