Hospital Performance Trends on National Quality Measures and the Association with Joint Commission Accreditation
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Evaluations of the impact of hospital accreditation have been previously hampered by the lack of nationally standardized data. One way to assess this impact is to compare accreditation status with other evidence‐based measures of quality, such as the process measures now publicly reported by The Joint Commission and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). OBJECTIVES: To examine the association between Joint Commission accreditation status and both absolute measures of, and trends in, hospital performance on publicly reported quality measures for common diseases. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Performance data for 2004 and 2008 from U.S. acute care and critical access hospitals were obtained using publicly available CMS Hospital Compare data augmented with Joint Commission performance data. MEASUREMENTS: Changes in hospital performance between 2004 and 2008, and percent of hospitals with 2008 performance exceeding 90% for 16 measures of quality‐of‐care and 4 summary scores. RESULTS: Hospitals accredited by The Joint Commission tended to have better baseline performance in 2004 than non‐accredited hospitals. Accredited hospitals had larger gains over time, and were significantly more likely to have high performance in 2008 on 13 out of 16 standardized clinical performance measures and all summary scores. CONCLUSIONS: While Joint Commission‐accredited hospitals already outperformed non‐accredited hospitals on publicly reported quality measures in the early days of public reporting, these differences became significantly more pronounced over 5 years of observation. Future research should examine whether accreditation actually promotes improved performance or is a marker for other hospital characteristics associated with such performance. Journal of Hospital Medicine 2011;6:458–465. © 2011 Society of Hospital Medicine
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
TJC-accredited hospitals often perform better on quality measures assessing the delivery of healthcare services according to evidence-based standards.
“TJC-accredited hospitals often perform better on quality measures assessing the delivery of healthcare services according to evidence-based standards [350].”
From Toward Safer Diagnoses: A SEIPS-Based Narrative Review of Diagnostic Errors (2026) · cites this paper as [350]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 172
Research works printed but not linked: 30
- [2]Niska RW Burt CW Emergency Response Planning in Hospitals, United States: 2003–2004. Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics; No. 391 2007 Hattsville, MD National Center for Health Statistics 17874715
- [3]Niska RW Burt CW Training for Terrorism-Related Conditions in Hospitals, United States: 2003–2004. Advance Data from Vital and Health Statistics; No. 380 2006 Hattsville, MD National Center for Health Statistics 17217184
- [4]Longo DR Hewett JE Ge B Shubert S Hospital patient safety: characteristics of best-performing hospitals J Healthcare Manag 2007 52 3 188 205 17552355
- [5]Devers KJ Pham HH Liu G What is driving hospitals' patient-safety efforts? Health Aff 2004 23 2 103 115 15046135
- [6]DeBritz JN Pollak AN The impact of trauma centre accreditation on patient outcome Injury 2006 37 12 1166 1171 17098237
- [7]Lemak CH Alexander JA Factors that influence staffing of outpatient substance abuse treatment programs Psychiatr Serv 2005 56 8 934 939 16088009
- [8]D'Aunno T Pollack HA Changes in methadone treatment practices. Results from a national panel study, 1988–2000 JAMA 2002 288 850 856 12186602
- [9]Landon BE Normand ST Lesser A Quality of care for the treatment of acute medical conditions in US hospitals Arch Intern Med 2006 166 2511 2517 17159018
- [10]Chen J Rathore S Radford M Krumholz H JCAHO accreditation and quality of care for acute myocardial infarction Health Aff 2003 22 2 243 254 12674428
- [13]Griffith JR Knutzen SR Alexander JA Structural versus outcome measures in hospitals: A comparison of Joint Commission and medicare outcome scores in hospitals Qual Manage Health Care 2002 10 2 29 38 11799828
- [14]Barker KN Flynn EA Pepper GA Bates D Mikeal RL Medication errors observed in 36 health care facilities Arch Intern Med 2002 162 1897 1903 12196090
- [15]Menachemi N Chukmaitov A Brown LS Saunders C Brooks RG Quality of care in accredited and non-accredited ambulatory surgical centers Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2008 34 9 546 551 18792659
- [18]Williams SC Schmaltz SP Morton DJ Koss RG Loeb JM Quality of care in U.S. hospitals as reflected by standardized measures, 2002–2004 N Engl J Med 2005 353 3 255 264 16034011
- [19]Jha AK Li Z Orav EJ Epstein AM Care in U.S. hospitals—the Hospital Quality Alliance Program N Engl J Med 2005 353 265 274 16034012
- [20]Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality Health Care in America Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century 2001 Washington, DC The National Academy Press
- [21]Hibbard JH Stockard J Tusler M Does publicizing hospital performance stimulate quality improvement efforts? Health Aff 2003 22 2 84 94 12674410
- [22]Williams SC Morton DJ Koss RG Loeb JM Performance of top ranked heart care hospitals on evidence-based process measures Circulation 2006 114 558 564 16880327
- [24]Palmer RH Using health outcomes data to compare plans, networks and providers Int J Qual Health Care 1998 10 6 477 483 9928586
- [25]Mant J Process versus outcome indicators in the assessment of quality of health care Int J Qual Health Care 2001 13 475 480 11769750
- [26]Chassin MR Does paying for performance improve the quality of health care? Med Care Res Rev 2006 63 1 122S 125S 16688928
- [27]Kfoury AG French TK Horne BD Incremental survival benefit with adherence to standardized health failure core measures: a performance evaluation study of 2958 patients J Card Fail 2008 14 2 95 102 18325454
- [28]Jha AK Orav EJ Li Z Epstein AM The inverse relationship between mortality rates and performance in the hospital quality alliance measures Health Aff 2007 26 4 1104 1110 17630453
- [29]Bradley EH Herrin J Elbel B Hospital quality for acute myocardial infarction: correlation among process measures and relationship with short-term mortality JAMA 2006 296 1 72 78 16820549
- [30]Williams SC Watt A Schmaltz SP Koss RG Loeb JM Assessing the reliability of standardized performance measures Int J Qual Health Care 2006 18 246 255 16431865
- [32]Normand SLT Wolf RE Ayanian JZ McNeil BJ Assessing the accuracy of hospital performance measures Med Decis Making 2007 27 9 20 17237448
- [34]Hartz AJ Krakauer H Kuhn EM Hospital characteristics and mortality rates N Engl J Med 1989 321 25 1720 1725 2594031
- [35]Goldman LE Dudley RA United States rural hospital quality in the Hospital Compare Database—accounting for hospital characteristics Health Policy 2008 87 112 127 18374447
- [36]Lehrman WG Elliott MN Goldstein E Beckett MK Klein DJ Giordano LA Characteristics of hospitals demonstrating superior performance in patient experience and clinical process measures of care Med Care Res Rev 2010 67 1 38 55 19638640
- [37]Werner RM Goldman LE Dudley RA Comparison of change in quality of care between safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals JAMA 2008 299 18 2180 2187 18477785
- [39]Pawlson LF Torda P Roski J O'Kane ME The role of accreditation in an era of market-driven accountability Am J Manag Care 2005 11 5 290 293 15898217
- Authors
- Schmaltz, S. P., Williams, S. C., Chassin, M. R., Loeb, J. M., & Wachter, R. M.
- Affiliations
- Joint Commission (US)
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- Corresponding author
- Schmaltz, Stephen P.
- Venue
- Journal of Hospital Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2011-10
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 454-461
- ISSN
- 1553-5592 (ISSN-L)
- 1553-5606
- PMC
- PMC3265714
- OpenAlex
- W2093032071
- Cited by
- 172
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 6
- FWCI
- 12.85
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Hospital Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Primary Care and Health Outcomes
- Keywords
- hospital accreditation, Joint Commission, hospital quality of care, acute care hospitals, critical access hospitals, process indicators, quality improvement
- MeSH terms
- Accreditation, Hospitals, Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, United States, Quality Indicators, Health Care
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
