Choosing a hospital: Is JCI the way to go?
A post that appeared on our company blog:
One question that confounds every individual travelling overseas for treatment is that of choosing a hospital. While most patients are able to hone in on the choice of a doctor/hospital through facilitator companies, referral doctors or their personal networks, a few are left in without enough information on the hospital to choose. In such instances, thanks to search engines and medical tourism associations with very little insight (and too much internet bandwidth at their disposal) in the international healthcare space, the patients are led to believe that JCI accredited hospitals alone are a credible destination.
JCI – Joint Commision International, is a popular, ‘private’ healthcare accreditation group in the United States. It is a US-based accreditation group that fulfils the requirements of an independent international body for healthcare standards accreditation. JCI is accredited by ISQua an accreditor of accrediting bodies. It was in early 2008 that JCI was recognized by ISQua . Apart from the JCI, other accreditation bodies from the following countries are approved by ISQua:-
- JCI of USA
- Australia
- Canada
- Egypt
- Hong Kong
- Ireland
- Japan
- Jordan
- Kyrgyz Republic
- South Africa
- Taiwan
- United Kingdom
- NABH of India
This international standardization body conveys the following message: “Any hospital that is accredited by ISQua approved accreditation body will be assured of the same patient safety and procedures of any hospital in developed world.” For instance, a NABH accredited hospital is as good as a JCI accredited one in terms of patient safety and treatment quality.
Economic considerations though mandate various healthcare insurance companies in the United States to recognize overseas hospitals accredited by JCI alone for in-patient treatment. This, in turn prompts hospitals already accredited by other ISQua affiliated bodies, to indulge in the futile and laborious exercise of obtaining JCI accreditation. As the entire world is moving towards an integrated healthcare solution transcending geographical boundaries, insurance companies too would be following suit in recognizing ISQua accredited hospitals. This would be a big and important step in breaking geographic barriers and provide insured clients with all the quality options they deserve.
Independent medical travellers would also benefit by considering ISQua related accreditations, if accreditation were the sole factor in choosing a treatment destination. In India, for instance, the NABH accreditation is ISQua accredited and thus a good enough quality stamp for a hospital.
The intent of this post is not to malign the effectiveness or efforts of JCI, but to lend some perspective to this issue of hospital accreditation in an international milieu.
One question that confounds every individual travelling overseas for treatment is that of choosing a hospital. While most patients are able to hone in on the choice of a doctor/hospital through facilitator companies, referral doctors or their personal networks, a few are left in without enough information on the hospital to choose. In such instances, thanks to search engines and medical tourism associations with very little insight (and too much internet bandwidth at their disposal) in the international healthcare space, the patients are led to believe that JCI accredited hospitals alone are a credible destination.
JCI – Joint Commision International, is a popular, ‘private’ healthcare accreditation group in the United States. It is a US-based accreditation group that fulfils the requirements of an independent international body for healthcare standards accreditation. JCI is accredited by ISQua an accreditor of accrediting bodies. It was in early 2008 that JCI was recognized by ISQua . Apart from the JCI, other accreditation bodies from the following countries are approved by ISQua:-
- JCI of USA
- Australia
- Canada
- Egypt
- Hong Kong
- Ireland
- Japan
- Jordan
- Kyrgyz Republic
- South Africa
- Taiwan
- United Kingdom
- NABH of India
This international standardization body conveys the following message: “Any hospital that is accredited by ISQua approved accreditation body will be assured of the same patient safety and procedures of any hospital in developed world.” For instance, a NABH accredited hospital is as good as a JCI accredited one in terms of patient safety and treatment quality.
Economic considerations though mandate various healthcare insurance companies in the United States to recognize overseas hospitals accredited by JCI alone for in-patient treatment. This, in turn prompts hospitals already accredited by other ISQua affiliated bodies, to indulge in the futile and laborious exercise of obtaining JCI accreditation. As the entire world is moving towards an integrated healthcare solution transcending geographical boundaries, insurance companies too would be following suit in recognizing ISQua accredited hospitals. This would be a big and important step in breaking geographic barriers and provide insured clients with all the quality options they deserve.
Independent medical travellers would also benefit by considering ISQua related accreditations, if accreditation were the sole factor in choosing a treatment destination. In India, for instance, the NABH accreditation is ISQua accredited and thus a good enough quality stamp for a hospital.
The intent of this post is not to malign the effectiveness or efforts of JCI, but to lend some perspective to this issue of hospital accreditation in an international milieu.
Comment
-
Comment by Medical Tourism City on June 17, 2009 at 7:30pm -
One reason is that the insurance companies don't know about any other accreditation systems so don't know what other standard to use. It is simply a matter of educating them and opening their eyes that there are other systems out thee. One of the big problems is no one is really discussing the accreditation debate issue, and other accreditation systems are not publicly discusssing or addressing it and helping to educate people. Therefore people only know what they know!
-
Comment by Srinivasa Raghavan on June 17, 2009 at 2:53pm -
@Helen: Thanks for your comments. I was wondering how many of these other accreditation bodies other than JCI are recognized for insurance cover by insurance companies for treatment within the US leave alone outside. The change in mindset would have to be triggered from within as well as outside.
-
Comment by Srinivasa Raghavan on June 17, 2009 at 2:44pm
-
@Jack:I presume the choice of the healthcare tourist is dictated by economic considerations such as recognition by insurance companies. I once had an insurance company in the US which provided medical-tourism insurance tell me that they would not cover in-patient charges for non-JCI hospitals which I found to be strange. I guess this would have to be driven from within and facilitators like us voicing our opinions would certainly help. Thanks for your comments.
-
Comment by Jack Schafer on June 17, 2009 at 12:11pm -
You are absolutely correct... we in the USA tend to think of JCI as THE accreditation agency, and they have done an excellent job, and if you're here in the US, those initials DO validate a Medical facility and/or service provider. As we're simply trying to inform and educate clients, accreditation is certainly an important aspect to their decisions - and as a Facilitator, I am going to start thinking more International.
Simply stated, “Internationally Accredited” would be more accurately and just as validating... Board Certified for Physicians is every bit as credible (and less disqualifying) than American Board Certified.
Most Americans are thoughtful and intelligent enough to realize that many International Providers are equal to or better that USA services… yet we still want them qualified by USA standards ? You make an excellent point !
Events
IPSC
Facebook Activity
Groups
© 2012 Created by Medical Tourism City.
You need to be a member of Medical Tourism City to add comments!
Join Medical Tourism City