Cargando…

Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits

BACKGROUND: Implementing an accredited quality and patient safety management system is inevitable for hospitals. Even in the case of an obligatory rule system, different approaches to implement such a system can be used: coercive (based on monitoring and threats of punishment) and catalytic (based o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weske, Ulrike, Boselie, Paul, van Rensen, Elizabeth L. J., Schneider, Margriet M. E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5791382/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29382331
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2865-8
_version_ 1783296624118726656
author Weske, Ulrike
Boselie, Paul
van Rensen, Elizabeth L. J.
Schneider, Margriet M. E.
author_facet Weske, Ulrike
Boselie, Paul
van Rensen, Elizabeth L. J.
Schneider, Margriet M. E.
author_sort Weske, Ulrike
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Implementing an accredited quality and patient safety management system is inevitable for hospitals. Even in the case of an obligatory rule system, different approaches to implement such a system can be used: coercive (based on monitoring and threats of punishment) and catalytic (based on dialogue and suggestion). This study takes these different approaches as a starting point to explore whether and how implementation actions are linked to compliance. By doing so, this study aims to contribute to the knowledge on how to increase compliance with obligatory rules and regulations. METHODS: The internal audit system (the ‘tracer system’) of a large Dutch academic hospital is used as a case to investigate different implementation approaches and their effect on compliance. This case allowed us to use a multi-actor and multi-method approach for data collection. Internal audits (N = 16) were observed, audit reports were analyzed, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with both the internal auditors (N = 23) and the ward leaders (N = 14) responsible for compliance. Framework analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Although all auditors use catalytic enforcement actions, these do not lead to (intended) compliance of all ward leaders. Rather, the catalytic actions contribute to (intended) compliance of ward leaders that are motivated, whereas they do not for the ward leaders that are not motivated. For the motivated ward leaders, catalytic enforcement actions contribute to (intended) compliance by increasing ward leaders’ knowledge of the rules and how to comply with them. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the effectiveness of implementation actions depends not only on the actions themselves, but also on the pre-existing motivation to comply. These findings imply that there is not one ‘best’ approach to the implementation of obligatory rules. Rather, the most effective approach depends on the willingness to comply with rules and regulations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-2865-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5791382
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57913822018-02-12 Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits Weske, Ulrike Boselie, Paul van Rensen, Elizabeth L. J. Schneider, Margriet M. E. BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Implementing an accredited quality and patient safety management system is inevitable for hospitals. Even in the case of an obligatory rule system, different approaches to implement such a system can be used: coercive (based on monitoring and threats of punishment) and catalytic (based on dialogue and suggestion). This study takes these different approaches as a starting point to explore whether and how implementation actions are linked to compliance. By doing so, this study aims to contribute to the knowledge on how to increase compliance with obligatory rules and regulations. METHODS: The internal audit system (the ‘tracer system’) of a large Dutch academic hospital is used as a case to investigate different implementation approaches and their effect on compliance. This case allowed us to use a multi-actor and multi-method approach for data collection. Internal audits (N = 16) were observed, audit reports were analyzed, and semi-structured interviews were conducted with both the internal auditors (N = 23) and the ward leaders (N = 14) responsible for compliance. Framework analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Although all auditors use catalytic enforcement actions, these do not lead to (intended) compliance of all ward leaders. Rather, the catalytic actions contribute to (intended) compliance of ward leaders that are motivated, whereas they do not for the ward leaders that are not motivated. For the motivated ward leaders, catalytic enforcement actions contribute to (intended) compliance by increasing ward leaders’ knowledge of the rules and how to comply with them. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that the effectiveness of implementation actions depends not only on the actions themselves, but also on the pre-existing motivation to comply. These findings imply that there is not one ‘best’ approach to the implementation of obligatory rules. Rather, the most effective approach depends on the willingness to comply with rules and regulations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-018-2865-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-01-30 /pmc/articles/PMC5791382/ /pubmed/29382331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2865-8 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Weske, Ulrike
Boselie, Paul
van Rensen, Elizabeth L. J.
Schneider, Margriet M. E.
Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits
title Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits
title_full Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits
title_fullStr Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits
title_full_unstemmed Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits
title_short Using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits
title_sort using regulatory enforcement theory to explain compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: the case of internal audits
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5791382/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29382331
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2865-8
work_keys_str_mv AT weskeulrike usingregulatoryenforcementtheorytoexplaincompliancewithqualityandpatientsafetyregulationsthecaseofinternalaudits
AT boseliepaul usingregulatoryenforcementtheorytoexplaincompliancewithqualityandpatientsafetyregulationsthecaseofinternalaudits
AT vanrensenelizabethlj usingregulatoryenforcementtheorytoexplaincompliancewithqualityandpatientsafetyregulationsthecaseofinternalaudits
AT schneidermargrietme usingregulatoryenforcementtheorytoexplaincompliancewithqualityandpatientsafetyregulationsthecaseofinternalaudits