Full length articleUnderstanding stakeholders' perspectives and experiences of general practice accreditation

- The accreditation program in Australian General Practices is considered to have “raised the bar” on safety and quality.
- Engagement and learning were considered to flow from The Standards and program being owned and specific to the general practice sector.
- There is a need to span the boundary between accreditation of organisational structures and processes (practice) and delivery care (practise).
- Limitations to the program included implementation issues, resource demands and a need for clearer outcome measures.
- Challenges included: financial incentives; flexibility; role of consumers; and, maintaining and expanding ongoing stakeholder engagement.

ObjectiveTo examine general practice accreditation stakeholders' perspectives and experiences to identify program strengths and areas for improvements.Design, setting and participantsIndividual (n = 2) and group (n = 9) interviews were conducted between September 2011-March 2012 with 52 stakeholders involved in accreditation in Australian general practices. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and thematically analysed. Member checking activities in April 2016 assessed the credibility and currency of the findings in light of current reforms.ResultsOverall, participants endorsed the accreditation program but identified several areas of concern. Noted strengths of the program included: program ownership, peer review and collaborative learning; access to Practice Incentives Program payments; and, improvements in safety and quality. Noted limitations in these and other aspects of the program offer potential for improvement: evidence for the impact of accreditation; resource demands; clearer outcome measures; and, specific experiences of accreditation.ConclusionsThe effectiveness of accreditation as a strategy to improve safety and quality was shaped by the attitudes and experience of stakeholders. Strengths and weaknesses in the accreditation program influence, and are influenced by, stakeholder engagement and disengagement. After several accreditation cycles, the sector has the opportunity to reflect on, review and improve the process. This will be important if the continued or extended engagement of practices is to be realised to assure the continuation and effectiveness of the accreditation program.