The Joint Commission Versus Joint Commission International

Abstract

Healthcare organizations around the world seek accreditation as a means to prove that their services meet established standards of practice and quality. In some countries, accreditation is a prerequisite for participation in public or private health insurance programs, whereas in others it helps to earn higher reimbursement rates. Among the healthcare accreditation organizations, The Joint Commission and Joint Commission International are known for their longevity, wide scope, and prestige, with the former being the dominant player in the United States, whereas the latter being highly recognized elsewhere. Although both have a common origin, their standards have evolved separately. This article compares The Joint Commission and Joint Commission International standards and specific requirements for medical equipment management and maintenance. While most of the standards are similar, some clear differences exist. Some of these differences are traceable to national laws, regulations, and standards, whereas others are caused by lessons learned by prior surveys in respective geographies or simply tradition. In-depth discussion of these differences helps clinical engineering professionals understand the rationale—or the lack of—behind those requirements, thereby allowing them to better prepare themselves for future surveys.