Can accreditation work as a tool for quality improvement in public health? A critical review

Public health departments play an important role in promoting and preserving the health of communities. The lack of a system to ensure their quality and accountability led to the development of a national voluntary accreditation program by Public Health Accreditation Board (PHAB). The concept that accreditation will lead to quality improvement in public health which will ultimately lead to healthy communities seems intuitive but lacks a robust body of evidence. A critical review of literature was conducted to explore if accreditation can lead to quality improvement in public health. The articles were selected from publically available databases using a specific set of criteria for inclusion, exclusion, and appraisal. To understand the relationship between accreditation and quality improvement, the potential strengths and limitations of accreditation process were evaluated. Recommendations for best practices are suggested so that public health accreditation can yield maximum benefits. A logic model framework to help depict the impact of accreditation on various levels of public health outcomes is also discussed in this thesis. The literature review shows that existing accreditation programs in other industries show limited but encouraging evidence that accreditation will improve quality and strengthen the delivery of public health services. While progress in introducing accreditation in public health can be informed by other accredited industries, the public health field has its own set of challenges. Providing incentives, creating financing strategies, and having a strong leadership will allow greater access to accreditation by all public health departments. The suggested recommendations include that continuous evaluation, public participation, systems approach, clear vision, and dynamic standards should become hallmarks of the accreditation process. Understanding the link between accreditation, quality improvement, and health outcomes will influence the successful adoption and implementation of the public health accreditation program. This review of literature suggests that accreditation is an important step in improving the quality of public health departments and in ultimately improving the health of communities. However, accreditation should be considered in an integrated system of tools and approaches to improve the public health practice. Hence, it is a means to an end - not an end unto itself.^

Prevalence and risk factors of asthma and work -related asthma among U.S. adults: Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988--1994

This cross-sectional analysis of the data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was conducted to determine the prevalence and determinants of asthma and wheezing among US adults, and to identify the occupations and industries at high risk of developing work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Separate logistic models were developed for physician-diagnosed asthma (MD asthma), wheezing in the previous 12 months (wheezing), work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Major risk factors including demographic, socioeconomic, indoor air quality, allergy, and other characteristics were analyzed. The prevalence of lifetime MD asthma was 7.7% and the prevalence of wheezing was 17.2%. Mexican-Americans exhibited the lowest prevalence of MD asthma (4.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.2, 5.4) when compared to other race-ethnic groups. The prevalence of MD asthma or wheezing did not vary by gender. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that Mexican-Americans were less likely to develop MD asthma (adjusted odds ratio (ORa) = 0.64, 95%CI: 0.45, 0.90) and wheezing (ORa = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.44, 0.69) when compared to non-Hispanic whites. Low education level, current and past smoking status, pet ownership, lifetime diagnosis of physician-diagnosed hay fever and obesity were all significantly associated with MD asthma and wheezing. No significant effect of indoor air pollutants on asthma and wheezing was observed in this study. The prevalence of work-related asthma was 3.70% (95%CI: 2.88, 4.52) and the prevalence of work-related wheezing was 11.46% (95%CI: 9.87, 13.05). The major occupations identified at risk of developing work-related asthma and wheezing were cleaners; farm and agriculture related occupations; entertainment related occupations; protective service occupations; construction; mechanics and repairers; textile; fabricators and assemblers; other transportation and material moving occupations; freight, stock and material movers; motor vehicle operators; and equipment cleaners. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma and wheeze were 26% and 27% respectively. The major industries identified at risk of work-related asthma and wheeze include entertainment related industry; agriculture, forestry and fishing; construction; electrical machinery; repair services; and lodging places. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma was 36.5% and work-related wheezing was 28.5% for industries. Asthma remains an important public health issue in the US and in the other regions of the world. ^