A comparative analysis of surveyors from six hospital accreditation programmes and a consideration of the related management issues.
OBJECTIVE
To gather data on how accreditors manage surveyors, to compare these data and to offer them to the accreditors for improvement and to the scientific community for knowledge of the accreditation process and reinforcement of the credibility of these processes.


METHODS
The data were gathered with the aid of a questionnaire sent to all accreditors participating in the study.


RESULTS
An important finding in this comparative study is the different contractual relationships that exist between the accreditors and their surveyors.


CONCLUSIONS
Surveyors around the world share many common features in terms of careers, training, work history and expectations. These similarities probably arise from the objectives of the accreditors who try to provide a developmental process to their clients rather than an 'inspection'.
Bohigas
L
L
Avedis Donabedian Foundation, Spain. luisbohigas@bcn.servicom.es
Brooks
T
T
Donahue
T
T
Donaldson
B
B
Heidemann
E
E
Shaw
C
C
Smith
D
D
D000068:Accreditation / Q000379:methods / Q000458:organization & administration*; D001315:Australia; D002170:Canada; D003625:Data Collection / Q000379:methods; D006761:Hospitals / Q000592:standards*; D006801:Humans; D007391:International Cooperation; D007591:Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations; D009520:New Zealand; D013030:Spain; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires; D006113:United Kingdom; D014481:United States