The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which has continuously evaluated the performance of healthcare systems, has recently invested much effort into hospital performance measurement. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the hospital performance measurement programs operated by international organizations or at the national level based on the OECD's hospital performance project. Health Insurance Review & Assessment service (HIRA)'s quality assessment was analyzed based on the analytical framework of the OECD's hospital performance project. The hospital performance measurement programs of WHO, Canada, Australia, United States and United Kingdom are briefly explored, in view of the conceptual framework, key performance dimensions and indicators that are currently in use. The OECD suggested seven key dimensions of hospital performance: timeliness, efficiency, continuity, effectiveness and appropriateness, staff orientation, patient orientation and safety. The analysis of the quality assessment program of HIRA, which operates 36 diseases and procedures and 347 indicators, shows that the numbers of indicators are relatively small in the areas of safety, patient centeredness and efficiency. Continuity of care and staff orientation are not fully developed also, but the situations are similar in other countries. In conclusion, hospital performance measurement using stable and comprehensive data should be developed to improve overall system performance, and discussions on a conceptual framework that can lay out directions and key performance domains need to take into place.

Readmission which reflects capacity to manage patients and general level of medical services has been known for one of the causes of medical expenditure due to inefficient service. Compared to disease-specific readmission, hospital wide readmission (HWR) is relatively easy to understand, and has merit to get over limitation of collateral medical services assessment; therefore, a growing interest in development and usage of readmission indicator as quality of care indicator focusing on all-disease is detected. In this study, we investigate current state of risk standardized readmission rate indicator used in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada, and examine the considerations when using readmission rate as quality indicator in Korea. Differences in risk-adjustment methods were showed among countries. The United States do not control race not to hide socio-demographic factors on readmission. Canada shows differentiation compared to other countries about reflecting community factors. All three-countries utilize readmission rate as monitoring quality of care rather than incentives or penalty due to the fact that readmission rate could not represent the whole quality of hospital and has a limitation at controlling socio-economic factors. Therefore, for usage readmission rate as quality indicator in Korea, preparing readmission classification standard for Korean medical environment and additional methods for acquiring information by using discharge summary is need. Moreover, continued discussion with clinical specialists is needed for obtain clinical reliability and validity.

Objectives: This study aimed to investigate how many healthcare professionals experienced near misses, what types of near misses occurred most often, and healthcare professionals' opinions about near misses at one university hospital in Korea. Methods: The authors developed a questionnaire including 26 core types of near misses and 4 questions about preventability and reporting barriers. The survey was conducted from Oct. 31st to Nov. 18th 2011, about 3 weeks, using a self-administrated questionnaire that was administered to 697 healthcare professionals (registered nurses, pharmacists, technicians, and nurses aides) who worked at a university hospital. Medical doctors and employees working in the department of administration were excluded. Results: About half of hospital workers experienced at least one or more near misses during the past one year. The drug dispensing process was the most common subcategory of near misses. Among the 26 items, patient falls was highest. Over 95% of respondents reported that the near miss they experienced was preventable. Also, more than half of respondents did not report the near miss and the main reason for omission was fear of blame. Conclusion: Regarding patient safety issues, a near miss is a very significant factor because it can be a potential adverse event. Therefore, we should grasp the size of the problem through tracking and analyzing near misses and should make an effort to reduce them. To do so, we should check whether our reporting system is well designed and functioning.

Objectives: Healthcare Accreditation Program in Korea started in 2011. The aim of this study is to contribute to the development of the Healthcare Accreditation Program in Korea by comparing the perception of the Healthcare Accreditation Program for the accredited hospitals and the surveyors. Methods: This study was performed targeting 77 accredited acute care hospitals and 245 surveyors who have surveyed acute care hospitals from 2010 to February 2014. They responded to our questionnaire via a survey website, and we analyzed the results. Results: We found that the hospitals rated the professionalism of surveyors more positively than surveyors. While average score of the hospitals was higher for 'The understanding of the accreditation standards and survey methods was correct' than that of the surveyors (p<0.01), average score of the surveyors was higher for 'Mediation and collaboration between surveyors were smooth' than that of the hospitals (p<0.05). And we found that the surveyors rated the Accreditation Program more positively than hospitals. While average score of the hospitals was higher for 'Surveyors have the professionalism' than that of the surveyors (p<0.05), average score of the surveyors was higher for 'It is easy to understand the accreditation standards and evaluation items' than that of the hospitals (p<0.01). Conclusion: In order to development of the accreditation program, it is necessary to strengthen the professionalism of surveyors and improve the acceptability of the accreditation program.

Purpose: Objective of this study was to investigate how often nurses to perform patient safety activities. Methods: 521 observations were collected in 9 hospitals by 107 nursing students. Nurses' patient safety care activities were measured 0 (not at all) to 10 (all the time) scores. Descriptive statistics, independent t-test, one way ANOVA, correlation, multiple regression used to analyse data. Results: Items like 'Initial nursing assessment', 'drug management bring on', 'preparation for radiology test', 'falls assessment', 'nursing record' got high scores. But, scores of 'patient identification', 'verbal order management', 'hand hygiene' were lower than others. Each scores were different significantly according to institutions and departments. Within a same institution, the variance of scores, especially in 'patient identification', 'hand hygiene' were great. Scores of activities were different according to characteristics of institutions like type, location, number of beds, teaching hospital, number of accreditation, JCI accreditation. Predictors influencing nurses' patient safety activities were type, location and accreditation. These predictors account for 19.4% of variance. Conclusion: Performance of nurses' patient safety activities were different significantly according to characteristics of institutions. The important items like 'patient identification', 'hand hygiene' had achieved lowest performance. Further researches are needed to improve the basic safety activities.