Medical staff's attitude toward NABH accreditation and standards

A Independent Study on the  attitude toward NABH accreditation and standards, of  Medical staff's , show some valuable insight , which are listed below :

On the first assessment, 20% respondents agreed to the need for accreditation, 40% thought it was namesake, 10% considered it to be beneficial to patients and 10% thought that it would help the health care professionals, whereas post-exposure, these figures changed to 90%, 60%, 100%, and 80% respectively. 90% of persons agreed that it was not for the benefits of the organization alone.

Effects of accreditation on services (positive effects)

Positive effects

On first assessment, 10% considered that accreditation improves the quality of service, 20% considered it is for better outlook about the services, 20%thought that it makes the work systematic, 10% thought it provides good image to the hospital, 10% thought it helps the healthcare professionals to update themselves, whereas postexposure, these figures changed to 100%, 80%, 70%, 96%, and 100%, respectively.

Effects of accreditation on services (negative effects)

Negative effects

On the first assessment, 30% of respondents found that Accreditation increases the workload of the staff, 60% thought it increases the documentation process, 10% found it is an unnecessary management intervention, 20% thought, with accreditation; there is a high chance of legal action by the patient. 80% agreed it affects the productivity of the staff, none considered it decreases job satisfaction level, whereas, pre-exposure, these figures were 80%, 80%, 70%, 70%, 20%, 40% respectively.

Effects of accreditation on patient care

After 6 months, 100% respondents considered that the initial assessment for inpatients must be documented within 2 h, 90% considered that every medical renewal entry should be dated and timed, 90% respondents agreed that medical records should be named and signed 80% wanted care plan to be countersigned by the clinician in-charge of the patient within 24 h. 90% agreed that accreditation improves the results, decreases medical errors and improves patient's rights and satisfaction. This was a significant change noticed compared to pre-exposure figures.

Attitude towards infection control policies.

Morbidity and mortality outcomes improved due to better implementation of injection control policies. With knowledge, more and more staff started to use better techniques which helped in improving results.

HR management

A majority agreed that the introduction of NABH policy improves working conditions, gives better job satisfaction and provides a feeling of security.


This study proved that the doctors and nurses had a positive attitude towards accreditation after 6 months. The present study was done to find out the level of attitude and knowledge level of medical staff on NABH accreditation in a selected hospital, which are on the way to NABH.

After training on NABH accreditation and standards, the knowledge, as well as the attitude of the staff toward standardization, changed. Doctors and nurses had a positive attitude on accreditation, 6 months later. Both the nurses and doctors were found to be less worried about the negative effects of accreditation.

The knowledge level among medical staff on NABH standards improved and a better compliant and harmonious working atmosphere was created between doctors and nurses. Moreover, patient care also improved. Staff was more satisfied with the working environment and their rights and in turn, Management was satisfied because of better results delivered in-patient care.