The Essential List of Mandatory HAS Criteria for Healthcare Facility Certification 2025 Quality Standards in French Healthcare Facilities The quality and safety of care are central concerns of modern healthcare systems. In France, the High Authority for Health (HAS) plays a key role in this process, as it is the body mandated by the 1996 ordinances to certify healthcare facilities. This evaluation procedure, which is independent of the facility and its governing bodies, focuses specifically on the quality and safety of care provided to patients. It is carried out by professionals, known as expert assessors, appointed by the HAS, who evaluate facilities based on objectives defined collectively at the national level by professionals and patients.
Healthcare facility certification goes far beyond mere administrative compliance. It is based on patients’ perspectives regarding their experience within the facility, evaluates outcomes not only in terms of health but also in terms of the overall care pathway (reception, information provided, team coordination, discharge), and engages teams in a pragmatic approach where they take the initiative to organize their practices to achieve results using the most appropriate methods. It also offers the possibility of relying on the HAS (French National Authority for Health) for self-assessment and constitutes recognition of the teams’ commitment to a process of continuous improvement in the quality and safety of care. Certification is neither an inspection nor a ranking among facilities, and does not interfere with other regulatory assessments. It is the only national system in France that offers a comprehensive framework for the analysis and external evaluation of the quality of care and services, serving as a motivating factor for healthcare professionals and patient representatives. Within this rigorous system, certain criteria are mandatory. These criteria correspond to fundamental requirements which, if not met, can potentially prevent certification. Understanding these mandatory criteria is therefore essential for any healthcare facility wishing to achieve and maintain a high level of quality and safety of care.
The French National Authority for Health (HAS) and the Evolution of Certification The healthcare facility certification process , launched 25 years ago, is part of a broader effort to ensure the quality of care in the healthcare sector and beyond. It addresses a legitimate expectation for transparency regarding the quality of services provided to patients, public authorities, and healthcare professionals, thereby fostering a collective approach to continuous improvement. Since its first version in June 1999, which promoted a culture of quality and safety in care, the process has continually evolved. The second iteration in 2005 introduced the evaluation of professional practices in care units, while the 2010 version (V2010) emphasized increased requirements in terms of patient care and risk management, particularly through priority required practices. The 2014 version strengthened healthcare facilities’ ability to continuously identify and manage their risks by introducing patient-centered assessment methods, such as the patient tracer method, and by engaging facility management on quality and safety issues. More recently, starting in 2021, the certification process has undergone a profound transformation, with three major objectives set by the HAS (French National Authority for Health) College: Making certification more clinically focused and better reflecting patient care outcomes: The goal is for certification to be meaningful for healthcare teams by focusing on their practices and patient outcomes in terms of effectiveness, safety, and satisfaction. The objectives and criteria are defined by consensus, are easy to share, and correspond to the requirements of good professional practices.
Simplify every aspect of the certification process : To encourage adoption, certification empowers institutions, prioritizes results over strict adherence to procedures, and provides practical, field-based evaluation methods.Promote the regional integration of healthcare facilities and the development of care pathways : Certification must recognize the efforts of institutions to improve the quality and safety of patients’ care pathways within their region, in coordination with all stakeholders in prevention, healthcare, social care, and social services.These developments address current quality challenges, including fostering patient engagement as partners in their individual and collective care, the shift from a resource-based approach to a results-based approach (appropriateness of care), the development of multidisciplinary teamwork, and adaptation to structural changes in the health system. The HAS itself is evaluated according to international standards, having been accredited by the International Society for Quality in Health Care (ISQua) since February 2023 for its entire certification process.
The structure of the 2025 certification framework The certification framework is the foundation of the
The framework is organized into three main chapters, each broken down into objectives and criteria:
Chapter 1: The Patient : This chapter focuses on the direct outcomes for patients, ensuring respect for their rights, consideration of their needs and preferences, and their involvement as partners in their care. It covers objectives such as respect for patient rights (1.1), patient information (1.2), patient involvement in their care plan (1.3), and the involvement of patients and their representatives in the life of the institution (1.4).Chapter 2: Care Teams : This chapter evaluates the teams’ ability to provide appropriate, effective, and safe care, to consult and coordinate throughout the patient’s care journey, and to manage risks associated with care. The objectives include team coordination (2.1), risk management related to practices (2.2), safety in high-risk areas (2.3), and a culture of accountability and evaluation (2.4).Chapter 3: The Institution : This chapter focuses on the institution and its governance, assessing its ability to drive continuous improvement in the quality and safety of care, to manage its professional resources, to strengthen its regional presence, and to adapt to digital innovations and eco-responsible care. The objectives are overall management through quality and safety of care (3.1), management of professional resources and skills (3.2), regional positioning (3.3), and adaptation to eco-responsible care and digital innovations (3.4).This framework is modular, incorporating 86 generic criteria applicable to all facilities and 32 specific criteria tailored to specific populations (children, the elderly), modes of care (inpatient and outpatient care), or areas of practice (emergency care, surgery, maternity care, mental health, radiation therapy, etc.).
HAS certification relies on a variety of complementary evaluation methods, designed to be grounded in real-world practice and reflect the reality of healthcare delivery. These methods are used both by HAS expert visitors during external inspections and, if the facility so chooses, by its own internal evaluators as part of a self-assessment process. The Tracer Patient: This method involves evaluating the quality and safety of care provided to a specific patient within the facility. It entails gathering, with the consent of the patient and/or their family, details of their experience. The evaluator meets with the patient and then speaks with the team providing their care. For external evaluations, only physician expert visitors are involved in this method. The Tracer Pathway: This method allows for the evaluation of the continuity and coordination of patient care, as well as teamwork and the culture of quality and safety of care. The evaluator meets with the teams involved in the patient’s care pathway and, accompanied by a professional, retraces the patient’s physical journey within the facility, meeting with the teams involved at the different stages. The Target Tracer: This involves evaluating the actual implementation of a specific process on-site. The evaluation begins in the field and, in the event of malfunctions, works its way back to the process organization. To do this, the evaluator meets with the teams, reviews relevant documents, and makes direct observations. Targeted tracers are conducted, for example, on the medication circuit, infection prevention, adverse event management, etc. The System Audit: This method aims to evaluate a process more comprehensively to ensure its control and its ability to achieve the defined objectives. The evaluation begins with a review of the process components, followed by meetings with management, the chair of the medical board, nursing management, heads of specific departments, and user representatives. Finally, it verifies how the process is implemented in practice with professionals and their supervisors.
Observations : Observations are made continuously during each tracer study (patient, pathway, target group). They are based on a list of factors that can be directly observed in the field, such as respect for patient dignity and privacy, accessibility of facilities, and control of infection risk.Each method is broken down into evaluation grids that incorporate the evaluation elements of the applicable generic and specific criteria. The responses to the grids ("Yes", "No", "N/A", "RI") are aggregated to calculate a score for each evaluation element, then for each criterion, objective, and chapter, resulting in an overall score for the institution. Advanced criteria are not included in this rating. The assessment also relies on the Quality and Safety of Care Indicators (QSCI) to measure the improvement momentum of healthcare facilities. The crucial importance of the HAS mandatory criteria: Among the 86 generic and 32 specific criteria of the HAS framework, 21 are classified as "mandatory." These criteria represent fundamental requirements for the quality and safety of care. Their distinctive feature lies in their potential impact on the certification decision: "If an assessment of one of these criteria is negative, the HAS reserves the right not to grant certification to the facility; this may affect the level of the decision." This underscores their critical role in assessing a facility’s compliance with essential care standards. The mandatory criteria cover diverse and fundamental areas, ranging from respecting patient rights to managing risks associated with professional practices, including emergency management and the facility’s overall quality and safety of care policy. They reflect the inalienable pillars upon which any quality healthcare service must be based. Let’s examine each of these mandatory criteria in detail, their assessment elements, and the HAS’s expectations. Criterion 1.1-01: Respect for the patient’s privacy and dignity. This fundamental mandatory criterion ensures that the facility implements measures to guarantee respect for the patient’s privacy and dignity in all circumstances. This includes the cleanliness and maintenance of the premises, the vigilance of professionals to avoid inappropriate remarks or attitudes (particularly the infantilization of vulnerable individuals such as the elderly or those living with disabilities), and the effective accessibility of equipment and services. The evaluation elements for this criterion focus on the patient’s experience and direct observations. From the patient’s perspective, it is verified that the reception and care provided respected their dignity, privacy, and integrity. Furthermore, access, circulation, premises, and signage must allow for easy movement. The expert visitors’ observations focus on the practices of healthcare professionals that ensure the patient’s dignity, privacy, and integrity, as well as on the compliance of the premises and equipment with these principles and safety standards. Particular attention is paid to accessibility for people with disabilities. This criterion is reinforced by the e-Satis Quality and Safety of Care Indicators (QSCI), which measure patient satisfaction and experience.
The care of children and adolescents requires an environment specifically tailored to their needs. This essential requirement means that minors should not be admitted to adult wards; however, if this does occur in exceptional cases, appropriate measures must be put in place (designated space, trained staff, secure environment). The presence of parents, which is essential for supporting the child, must be arranged in accordance with the care plan.
The evaluation criteria verify that best practices related to the specific needs of minors are applied in the facilities that admit them. It is imperative that parental presence be provided around the clock, unless otherwise advised by a doctor. Furthermore, hospitalized minors must have access to age-appropriate recreational and educational activities. Observations are also conducted to ensure that the environment and facilities are suitable for respecting the privacy, dignity, and safety of minors, including when they are cared for in an adult ward.
This mandatory criterion emphasizes the obligation of all healthcare professionals to regularly and appropriately assess the patient's pain, whether acute or chronic. Anticipation and effective pain management are crucial for preserving the patient’s dignity, improving their quality of life, and promoting their recovery. Professionals must adapt treatments and use the most appropriate techniques to provide rapid and lasting relief from suffering, taking into account the assessment scale tailored to the patient’s situation (vulnerability, disability, involvement of family and friends). Assessment elements include encouraging the patient to express their pain and ensuring its relief. For professionals, it is verified that anticipation and pain relief measures are documented in the patient’s file, that pain reassessments are recorded to adapt treatment, and that non-pharmacological approaches are offered. This criterion is also linked to the IQSS (Quality, Safety, and Environment) assessment of pain management. Criterion 1.1-06: Compassionate Care for All Patients. Compassionate care is a fundamental principle that encompasses respect, dignity, and well-being for each individual, involving all stakeholders in the institution. This essential criterion requires not only high-quality medical care, but also particular attention to communication, personalized support, and respect for patient autonomy (hydration, nutrition, hygiene, etc.). It includes active listening, the absence of any form of mistreatment, and the creation of a safe environment. Promoting respectful care is inseparable from the well-being of healthcare professionals. The evaluation criteria focus on the team’s ability to assess the patient’s autonomy in meeting their basic needs, even during periods of high activity. From the patient’s perspective, it is verified that they have received the necessary assistance for their basic needs, that professional practices are respectful, and that all staff members introduce themselves. The team must also identify risks to patient well-being, implement improvement measures, and know how to report potential situations of internal mistreatment.
Patient involvement in their care ensures effectiveness and reduces risks. This mandatory criterion aims to ensure that patients give their free and informed consent and adhere to and follow their care plan, which requires their participation in setting goals, implementing the plan, and monitoring progress. The care plan, established following a comprehensive assessment and taking into account the patient’s needs and preferences, must serve as a guiding principle, adjusted in collaboration with the patient, taking into account any potential deterioration in their mental health.
The assessment criteria focus on presenting patients with the various treatment options, along with their benefits and risks, so that they can express their preferences and needs and provide informed consent. From the professionals’ perspective, an initial comprehensive assessment (medical, psychological, social, autonomy, and rehabilitation) is expected to be conducted by professionals from the relevant disciplines and support services. The team must develop an appropriate care plan, adapt it as the patient’s situation evolves, and document it in the patient’s medical record. This criterion is supported by the IQSS (Quality, Safety, and Quality of Care) indicators linked to e-Satis.
This mandatory criterion is essential for the continuous improvement of the quality of care. The institution must take into account the results of patient satisfaction and experience surveys when defining the guidelines for its policy on improving the quality and safety of care. The detailed analysis of the results must be shared with healthcare professionals, and regular follow-up must be conducted to ensure that improvement objectives are met. Evaluation elements for governance include encouraging patients to participate in satisfaction surveys (particularly e-Satis), monitoring this participation, and integrating improvement actions resulting from the analysis of patient satisfaction and experience results into the quality improvement program. For healthcare professionals, it is expected that the results of patient satisfaction and experience assessments will be shared with care teams every six months. Teams must analyze their own results and implement improvement actions, and the recommendations of the Users’ Committee (CDU) must be taken into account.
This mandatory criterion recognizes the importance of incorporating a physical examination into psychiatric care. This examination, which is performed for all patients admitted to psychiatric units, enables differential diagnosis and the identification of somatic comorbidities that may interfere with psychiatric care. It must be conducted promptly, particularly in cases of involuntary admission.
The evaluation criteria specify that a physical examination must be performed within 24 hours for involuntary inpatient admissions to psychiatric units. For patients admitted for voluntary care without going through the emergency department, the physical examination must be performed within an appropriate timeframe (maximum 3 working days). If the patient was seen in the emergency department, the report must be included in the medical record and the follow-up instructions implemented. Regular somatic monitoring must be documented in the discharge summary. This criterion is linked to the IQSS (Quality, Safety, and Quality of Care) criteria for coordination and somatic care during inpatient hospitalization.
Prescribing medication is a critical step in the care pathway. This mandatory requirement mandates that medical teams follow best practices to ensure the safety and effectiveness of treatments. This entails a clear prescription that is tailored to the patient’s specific characteristics (health status, medical history, allergies, drug interactions) and complies with guidelines. The legibility of the prescription is essential to prevent any confusion.
The assessment criteria verify that the admission prescription takes into account the patient's usual treatment. The prescription must clearly state the prescriber's identification and signature, the date, the time, the INN (International Nonproprietary Name) of the drugs, the dosage, the solvent and its volume (for injectables), and the route of administration. The patient's ability to self-manage (outside of the PAAM program) must be assessed and documented. Any conditional prescription must be justified, and prescriptions must be filled in a timely manner by authorized professionals, without transcription by non-medical personnel.
Administration is the final step in the medication cycle, where any undetected error can cause harm to the patient. This mandatory criterion requires healthcare teams to strictly follow medical prescriptions, applying the "5 Rights" (right patient, right medication, right dose, right route, right time). Medication preparation must comply with recommendations (extemporaneous preparation, crushing if necessary, identification until administration). The evaluation criteria require that authorized professionals adhere to good preparation practices (avoiding interruptions in tasks) and administration practices. High-risk situations (injectables, chemotherapy, etc.) must be identified and managed with particular precautions. The concordance between the product, the patient, and the prescription must be systematically verified before administration, and the administration (or the reason for non-administration) must be documented in the patient’s record at the time of administration. The patient’s self-administered medication intake must also be documented. Criterion 2.2-06: Prevention of Medication Errors This mandatory criterion emphasizes the proactive prevention of medication errors. It relies on rigorous practices, the vigilance of healthcare teams, and ongoing professional development. High-risk medications, which carry a greater risk of harm in the event of an error, must be specifically managed at every stage of the process, and their evolving list must take into account feedback and "never events." Preparations in controlled environments (chemotherapy, etc.) are crucial to prevent contamination and ensure dose accuracy. The evaluation criteria require that professionals be trained in medication risk prevention and know how to manage the highest-risk medications. A collaborative and appropriate list of high-risk medications must be available to professionals. The controlled-atmosphere preparation process must be fully controlled (prescription, pharmaceutical analysis, preparation, dispensing, transport, storage, administration). Finally, medication errors must be systematically analyzed as a team and followed up with an action plan.
Standard hygiene precautions form the foundation of healthcare-associated infection prevention and apply to all patients. This mandatory requirement covers hand hygiene, the use of personal protective equipment (gloves, masks, gowns), the management of excreta and waste, as well as the maintenance of equipment and surfaces. The use of alcohol-based hand rubs at key moments is essential, as is refraining from wearing jewelry on the hands and wrists.
The assessment criteria verify that the team complies with hand hygiene guidelines (before and after patient contact, before aseptic procedures, etc.) and prioritizes the use of alcohol-based hand rub. The team must follow best practices for excreta management (personal protective equipment, appropriate equipment) and be familiar with the procedures to follow in the event of an exposure to bloodborne pathogens. Improvements in practices must be based on the regular analysis of indicators in collaboration with the Operational Hygiene Team (OHT). Observations focus on hand hygiene prerequisites (no jewelry, short sleeves, short nails). This criterion is linked to the IQSS (Individual Quality and Safety Assessment) regarding the consumption of hydroalcoholic solutions (ICSHA).
Managing life-threatening emergencies requires immediate response and optimal coordination to save the patient's life. This essential requirement necessitates that healthcare professionals receive ongoing training in emergency protocols, and that a clear organizational structure ensures rapid assessment of the situation, seamless communication between teams, and the immediate availability of equipment and medications. Emergency simulation exercises are essential for evaluating and improving procedures. The elements for evaluating professionals include the existence of a single, dedicated phone number to contact an authorized physician in case of a life-threatening emergency, training for all healthcare professionals in first aid procedures, and the availability and regular monitoring of emergency carts or bags. The completion of simulated scenarios is also verified. Governance must assess the effectiveness of the life-threatening emergency response system. Criterion 2.3-06: Risk Management in Interventional Areas In interventional areas, risks—particularly infectious risks—are high and require exemplary rigor. This mandatory criterion emphasizes mastery of hygiene practices, the sterilization of equipment, and the maintenance of premises. Equipment must be disinfected regularly and checked before each procedure. Healthcare professionals must follow strict protocols to limit contamination, including aseptic techniques and the wearing of appropriate attire. Particular attention is paid to traffic flow.
The evaluation elements verify that the team performs all the steps of patient preparation according to the protocol in force (shower, hair removal, cutaneous antisepsis). Professionals must document the conformity of the operating equipment at the opening of the room. Observations concern the wearing of clothing and equipment adapted and strictly dedicated to the interventional sector. This criterion is linked to the QSCI on surgical site infections.
The "Patient Safety" checklist is a crucial tool for enhancing the safety of surgical interventions. This imperative criterion highlights its systematic and exhaustive use at each stage of care (patient identification, verification of the surgical site, equipment control, procedure validation). The HAS encourages professionals to adapt this checklist for better ownership. Regular analysis of its implementation allows for the identification of discrepancies and improvement of communication and coordination.
The evaluation elements require that a checklist, possibly adapted to HAS recommendations, be systematically and exhaustively completed by operating room and interventional sector teams at each stage, in the presence of the professionals concerned. Evaluations of its implementation, including monitoring of Go/No Go (elements to be verified before moving to the next stage), must be followed by the teams, and improvement actions implemented based on the analysis of the results of the monitoring indicators.
The care of pregnant women requires particular attention to the prevention of major obstetric risks. This imperative criterion aims to ensure that teams are trained to rapidly detect potential complications (postpartum hemorrhage, pre-eclampsia, dystocic deliveries) and to apply strict protocols to anticipate them. Enhanced prenatal monitoring and effective management of obstetric emergencies are paramount. Emergency simulations and fluid communication contribute to optimal responsiveness.
The evaluation elements for professionals include the availability of all elements of the patient record upon admission, even in emergencies. The team must master the interpretation of the fetal heart rate and obstetric maneuvers through training. The emergency equipment for life-threatening postpartum hemorrhage must be verified and compliant, and the life-threatening emergency procedure must be accessible and known to professionals.
Birth is a critical moment where securing the care of the newborn is paramount for their health and well-being. This imperative criterion requires care teams to follow protocols for immediate identification of the infant, prevention of infections, and assessment of vital functions (Apgar score). Continuous monitoring allows for rapid detection of any anomalies. Essential care (temperature maintenance, feeding) must be systematically performed, and clear communication with parents is necessary.
The evaluation elements for professionals verify that all professionals caring for newborns are trained through simulation. They must know the management procedures (neonatal resuscitation, neonatal infection). Delayed umbilical cord clamping and skin-to-skin contact must be documented, and the reason given if not performed. The newborn's temperature must be recorded and documented. Breastfeeding support must be part of a formalized quality approach, and professionals must analyze their results to define improvement measures.
This imperative criterion strictly governs the practices of isolation and, where applicable, restraint of hospitalized patients without consent, in order to guarantee respect for their rights and dignity. These measures should only be used as a last resort to prevent imminent danger. Care teams must ensure that each decision is medically justified, proportionate, and regularly re-evaluated.
The evaluation elements require that the decision to isolate, taken by a psychiatrist and possibly accompanied by a prescription for restraint, be documented in the patient's record, specifying the monitoring methods. A psychiatric and somatic examination must be performed at the time of isolation. Isolation must take place in a dedicated space respecting privacy, dignity, and safety, with a means of calling for the patient if restrained. The nurse must monitor the patient's somatic and psychological state and document it. A clinical analysis must be offered to the patient upon release from isolation to prevent recurrence, and the team must analyze the clinical practice indicators related to isolation and restraint.
The fight against antibiotic resistance is a public health priority, and this mandatory criterion contributes directly to it. Compliance with good antibiotic therapy practices is essential to limit serious complications and prolonged hospital stays. The justification and systematic re-evaluation of antibiotic prescriptions are at the heart of this approach.
The evaluation elements verify that the hospital implements the key elements of a good antibiotic use program (policy, training plan, evaluation strategy). Practitioners must be trained in the proper use of antibiotics. Any prescription of antibiotics and its extension must be justified in the record. Practitioners must refer to a reference and be able to call on an antibiotic therapy referent. Prescriptions must be systematically re-evaluated between the 24th and 72nd hour. The OHT, the teams, the antibiotic therapy referent, the PUI (Pharmacy for Internal Use) and the microbiology laboratory must monitor antibiotic consumption and resistance.
This imperative criterion places the hospital's governance at the center of the approach to improving the quality and safety of care. The policy must set personalized objectives based on an analysis of all available data (patient perspective, indicators, risks). Its development, implementation, and evaluation must be participatory, involving management, the CME (Medical Establishment Commission), supervisors, professionals, the nursing care commission, and user representatives. It must be translated into a single, structured, relevant, and personalized action program.
The evaluation elements require that the CME develop and monitor the quality/safety policy with the stakeholders mentioned. The priority orientations must be based on an analysis of all indicators (QSCI, patient experience) and specific risks. The program for improving the quality and safety of care (PIQSC) must take into account the recommendations of other external evaluation authorities (ARS, ASN, CGLPL, ABM). This PIQSC must be structured, relevant, updated, unique, and evaluated annually. Management and professionals must know the main actions of the PIQSC concerning them.
For a benevolent safety culture that analyzes error rather than condemning it, this imperative criterion calls on governance to actively promote the reporting of adverse events and near misses. Vigilance management and the analysis of AEAS (adverse events associated with care) are seen as opportunities for collective improvement in patient safety.
The evaluation elements require that serious adverse events associated with care be systematically analyzed with the teams concerned, according to HAS methods. A summary of the contributing factors and action plans must be disseminated to professionals and user representatives. SAEs must be systematically reported on the national reporting portal, with a part 2 within three months. The SAEs analyzed as part of the accreditation must be transmitted internally and their improvement actions contribute to the PIQSC. Professionals must be trained in announcing harm related to care.
This imperative criterion aims to ensure that the hospital is prepared to deal with exceptional health situations, i.e., events likely to cause significant hospital tensions. This involves identifying threats and implementing a graded management plan (level 1 for limited impact, level 2 or white plan for major impact). The white plan must provide for the activation of a crisis unit, the mobilization of resources, and communication.
The evaluation elements verify that the risk categories (including digital risks) are identified. The tension and exceptional situation management plan(s) must be developed collectively. The crisis unit must be operational within 45 minutes of the alert, with the necessary tools and procedures. Crisis management exercises and real activations must be followed by a feedback (RETEX) leading to improvement actions. The necessary material and human resources must be known and quickly mobilized, and their operational readiness verified. The professionals concerned must know the governance, the methods of alert and implementation of crisis plans.
Continuity of care is fundamental to ensuring that patients receive prompt and appropriate care at all times. This imperative criterion requires the continuous availability of medical and paramedical professionals, contributing to better emergency management and constant patient monitoring. It is based on rules of presence as well as a system of on-call duty ensuring the permanence of care 24/7.
The evaluation elements focus on the conformity of the medical and paramedical organization to the recommendations and regulations, guaranteeing adequate care. It is verified that caregivers can reach a doctor at any time. In addition, solutions must be mobilized in the event of unforeseeable absenteeism.
This imperative criterion aims to reduce avoidable visits to general emergency departments for people over 75 years of age. The hospital, in collaboration with its local partners (general practitioners, EHPAD, HAD), must formalize short circuits and/or implement telemedicine networks. The objective is to ensure adapted and coordinated care upstream, thus avoiding unnecessary and potentially harmful travel for this vulnerable population.
The evaluation elements require that specialty departments (cardiology, pulmonology, psychiatry, etc.) and geriatrics and emergency departments participate in the care of unscheduled elderly patients, with an organization of actors in place. Hospitals must identify referral hospitals to contact for advice, and have telemedicine tools (consultation and/or advice). Each specialty department must offer telemedicine solutions to local correspondents to avoid transfers. Specific indicators (number of visits to the emergency room by patients aged 75 and over, whether or not followed by hospitalization, length of stay PMSI MCO) must be measured, and the hospital must establish an improvement program based on these results.
The imperative criteria of the HAS certification standards for healthcare establishments are not simply requirements to be ticked off; they embody the unshakeable foundations of a culture of quality and care safety in France. By focusing on such crucial aspects as respect for patient dignity and privacy, prevention of medication errors, management of life-threatening emergencies, adaptation of the environment for minors, and prevention of avoidable transfers for the elderly, these criteria push facilities to achieve operational and ethical excellence.
The fact that a negative evaluation on one of these criteria could potentially lead to non-certification highlights their role as an essential safeguard. They represent the red lines not to be crossed, the minimum commitments that any hospital must respect to ensure the safety and well-being of its patients.
Beyond compliance, the rigorous implementation of these mandatory criteria promotes a dynamic of continuous improvement, stimulating collective reflection, professional training, and the adaptation of practices to the best recommendations. They encourage a patient-centered approach, where the patient's experience and satisfaction are not only measured but actively taken into account. Finally, they strengthen team coordination and governance, creating an environment conducive to innovation and comprehensive, integrated care.
