Factors Associated with Non-Compliance with Healthcare Accreditation in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background/Objectives: Compliance with healthcare standards is an absolute must for every healthcare organization seeking accreditation. Several factors were found to affect compliance, and in Saudi Arabia, certain standards were observed for non-compliance. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis seeks to identify the factors associated with non-compliance with healthcare accreditation in Saudi Arabia. Methods: This study adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The population, intervention, comparison, and outcome (PICO) model was used to refine the research question. The Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (Press) guidelines were used to improve the search strategy. The databases used for the search were PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar. The dates searched were from 1 January 2000 to 1 November 2024. We used a data extraction form for study characteristics and outcome data, which was piloted on five studies in this review. The risk of bias was assessed by using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool and the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The analysis was carried out using the Fisher r-to-z transformed correlation coefficient as the outcome measure. A random-effects model was fitted to the data. Results: A total of ten studies were included for qualitative synthesis and five for quantitative synthesis. Several factors were observed for non-compliance, including insufficient training organization hurdles, a lack of implementation strategies, and the attitudes of healthcare providers. The estimated average correlation coefficient based on the random-effects model was 0.2568 (95% CI: −0.1190 to 0.6326). Conclusions: The dimension of quality in healthcare through pooled correlations from various studies highlighted a weak association among these dimensions.