Comparison of major clinical outcomes between accredited and nonaccredited hospitals for inpatient care of acute myocardial infarction

Abstract

Hospital accreditation programs are used worldwide to improve the quality of care and improve patient safety. It is of great help in improving the structure of hospitals, but there are mixed research results on improving the clinical outcome of patients. The purpose of this study was to compare the levels of core clinical outcome indicators after receiving inpatient services from accredited and nonaccredited hospitals in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). For all patients with AMI admitted to general hospitals in Korea from 2010 to 2017, their 30-day mortality and readmissions and length of stay were compared according to accreditation status. In addition, through a multivariate model that controls various patients’ and hospitals’ factors, the differences in those indicators were analyzed more accurately. The 30-day mortality of patients admitted to accredited hospitals was statistically significantly lower than that of patients admitted to nonaccredited hospitals. However, for 30-day readmission and length of stay, accreditation did not appear to yield more desirable results. This study shows that when evaluating the clinical impact of hospital accreditation programs, not only the mortality but also various clinical indicators need to be included, and a more comprehensive review is needed.