Table 2. The comparison between accreditation programs based on 23 defined attributes.

Organization name Attributes	JCAHO	CCHSA	ACHS	ANAES	QHNZ	UK programs
Effect on quality improvement	****	**	**	*	*	*
Effect on safety improvement	****	**	*	*	*	*
Improving health care management integration	***	**	*	*	*	*
Provides health care organizations database	*
Designing an international branch	*	-	-	-	-	-
Influenced other accreditation programs	***	*	*	*	*	*
Evidence of public confidence in process	****	**	*	*	*	*
Emphasis on efficiency and effectiveness	***	**	*	*	*	*
Evidence of ongoing innovation	****	**	*	*	*	*
Influence on global accreditation standards	****	**	*	*	*	*
Emphasis on patients' rights and providing an ethical atmosphere	***	*	*	*	*	*
Focus on information management	***	*	*	*	*	*
History of organization	****	***	**	*	*	*
Effective relationship with stakeholders	***	**	**	**	**	**
Outcomes suitable for public reporting)	***	**	**	**	**	**
Agreement with AGIL indicator	***	***	*	**
Breadth of activity scope	***	**	**	*	**	*
Accredited with ISQua	*	*	*	-	-	*
Considers all 3 types of performance indicators	*	*	-	-	-	*
Clear Statement of Intent	*	*	*	-	-	-
Voluntary Participation	*	*	*	-	*	*
Government/non Government Organizations	*	*	*	-	-	*
Span of coverage and scientific level	****	**	*	*	*	*