Analysis Of Implementation Of Puskesmas Accreditation Policy In Medan City In 2023
Keywords:
Implementation, Policy, Accreditation of Community Health CentersAbstract
Community health centers must be accredited to ensure good quality of service. Community health center accreditation is recognition given to community health centers after meeting accreditation standards. Medan City has 41 community health centers, 39 of which have been accredited, predominantly basic and intermediate status (87%). The preliminary study describes the problems in implementing community health center accreditation, including communication, resources, attitudes of leaders and employees, organizational structure and support from health services. The aim of the research is to analyze the implementation of community health center accreditation policies in Medan City. This research uses a descriptive analysis method with a qualitative approach by means of observation, in-depth interviews and collecting documentation from research informants. The selection of research informants used purposive sampling. The main informants are people who are directly involved in implementing accreditation policies at community health centers. Research variables include communication, resources, disposition/attitude, organizational structure, and health service support. The research results show that communication at the community health center is running well, but the instruments and standards for community health center accreditation are still poorly understood. Human resources are not distributed evenly and some have excessive workloads, budget support and facilities are not optimal. The attitude of officers in general is good towards accreditation, but the distribution of tasks is not fair and equitable. The organizational structure has been determined, work procedures are in place. However, the commitment of the leadership and officers to carry out accreditation has not been developed. The health department supports the implementation of accreditation. However, coaching and supervision has not been scheduled and is not continuous. The conclusion was that communication, resources, disposition/attitude, organizational structure, and support from the health service were not fully functioning well, and obstacles were found in understanding and fulfilling accreditation standard documents. Suggestions for more intense, sustainable and quality guidance for community health centers in implementing accreditation policies.
Downloads
References
. Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 71 Tahun 2013 Tentang Pelayanan Kesehatan Pada Jaminan Kesehatan Nasional.
. Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 46 Tahun 2015 Tentang Akreditasi Puskesmas, Klinik Pratama, Tempat Praktik Mandiri Dokter, dan Tempat Praktik Mandiri Dokter Gigi.
. Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 43 Tahun 2019 Tentang Pusat Kesehatan Masyarakat.
. Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Nomor 34 Tahun 2022 Tentang Akreditasi Pusat Kesehatan Masyarakat, Klinik, Laboratorium Kesehatan, Unit Tranfusi Darah, Tempat Praktik Mandiri Dokter, dan Tempat Praktik Mandiri Dokter Gigi.
. Kemenkes RI, 2021. Pedoman Pembinaan Terpadu Puskesmas Oleh Dinas Kesehatan.
. Dinas Kesehatan Propinsi Sumatera Utara, 2021. Profil Dinas Kesehatan Propinsi Sumatera Utara Tahun 2021.
. Dinas Kesehatan Kota Meda, 2021. Profil Dinas Kesehatan Kota Medan Tahun 2021.
. Ayuningtyas, 2018. Analisis Kebijakan Kesehatan. Depok: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
. Akal Riyadi, 2017. Hubungan Status Akreditasi Puskesmas Dengan Tingkat Kepuasan Pasien di Puskesmas Kabupaten Bantul.
. Braithwaite, J. et al., 2012. ‘Comparison of health service accreditation programs in low- and middle-income countries with those in higher income countries: across-sectional study’, International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 24.
. Dessy Sutanti, dkk., 2022. Studi Analisis Ketercapaian Implementasi Kebijakan Akreditasi Puskesmas Dan Kinerja Puskesmas Di Kabupaten Kuningan. Journal Of Public Health Inovation Vol. 02. No. 02, Juni 2022.
. Devy Laksmita, 2021. Analisis Implementasi Kebijakan Akreditasi Puskesmas Terhadap Manajemen Upaya Kesehatan Masyarakat (UKM) di Puskesmas Kembaran I Kabupaten Banyumas. http://repository.unsoed.ac.id/
. Dunn, 2003. Pengantar Analisis Kebijakan Publik. Yogyakarta: Universitas Gajah Mada.
. Edward, 1980. Implementing Public Policy. Amerika Serikat: Hopkins University.
. Farzana, dkk., 2016. Analisis Kesiapan Akreditasi Dasar Puskesmas Mangkang Di Kota Semarang. Jurnal Kesehatan Masyarakat (e - Journal).
. Grindle, 1980. Politics and Policy Implementation in The Thrid World. Princnton: University Press, New Jersey.
. Mariana, F., 2017. Upaya Perbaikan Akreditasi Puskesmas Berdasarkan Analisis Organization Learning Capability, Organizational Learning Process dan Learnimg Organization (Studi di Lima Puskesmas di Kota Mojokerto).Universitas Airlangga.
. Molyadi, 2017. Pelaksanaan Kebijakan Akreditasi di Kabupaten Kubu Raya. Universitas Gadjah Mada.
. Molyadi, dkk., 2018. Pelaksanaan Kebijakan Akreditasi Puskesmas di Kabupaten Kubu Raya. Jurnal Kebijakan Kesehatan Indonesia.
. Nasir Umar, Litaker, D. and Terris, D. D., 2009. ‘Toward More Sustainable Health Care Quality Improvement in Developing Countries: The “‘Little Steps’” Approach’, Q Manage Health Care, 18.
. Pomey, M. et al., 2010. ‘Does accreditation stimulate change ? A study of the impact of the accreditation process on Canadian healthcare organizations’, Imlementation Science, 5.
. Riesa, D., 2018. Keberlanjutan Implementasi Program Akreditasi Puskesmas Pasca Terakreditasi Di Kabupaten Lumajang. Universitas Gajah Mada
. Subarsono, 2010. Analisis Kebijakan Publik (Konsep, Teori dan Aplikasi).Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
. Suratman, 2017. Kebijakan, Generasi Implementasi dan Evaluasi Publik. Surabaya: CAPIYA.
. Widodo, 2006. Analisis Kebijakan Publik : Konsep & Aplikasi Analisis Proses Kebijakan Publik. Jakarta: Banyumedia Publishing.
. Winarno, 2012. Kebijakan Publik Teori dan Proses. Yogyakarta: Pessindo.
