Cargando…

Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool

BACKGROUND: The deployment of digital health systems may be impeded by barriers that are, or are linked to underlying enduring institutions. Attempting to challenge the barriers without addressing the underpinning institution may be ineffective. This study reflects on ways actors may surmount instit...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Mureyi, Dudzai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8805250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35101019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01769-x
_version_ 1784643204843307008
author Mureyi, Dudzai
author_facet Mureyi, Dudzai
author_sort Mureyi, Dudzai
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The deployment of digital health systems may be impeded by barriers that are, or are linked to underlying enduring institutions. Attempting to challenge the barriers without addressing the underpinning institution may be ineffective. This study reflects on ways actors may surmount institutionalised barriers to the uptake of digital tools in health systems. METHODS: I applied Institutional theory concepts to an autoethnographic case study of efforts to introduce a digital tool to provide citizens with medicines information. RESULTS: The tool’s uptake was impeded because of state regulators’ institutionalised interpretation of pharmaceutical advertising laws, which rendered the tool illegal. I, along with allies beyond the health sector, successfully challenged the regulators’ institutionalised interpretation of pharmaceutical advertising laws through various actions. These actions included: framing the tool as legal and constitutional, litigation, and redefining these concepts: ‘advertising’, ‘health institution’, and the role of regulatory bodies vis a vis innovation. CONCLUSION: After identifying a barrier as being institutionalised or linked to an institution, actors might challenge such barriers by engaging in institutional work; i.e. deliberate efforts to challenge the relevant institution (e.g. a law, norm or shared belief). Institutional work may require the actions of multiple actors within and beyond the health sector, including judicial actors. Such cross-sectoral alliances are efficacious because they provide institutional workers with a broader range of strategies, framings, concepts and forums with which to challenge institutionalised barriers. However, actors beyond the health system (e.g. the judiciary) must be inquisitive about the potential implications of the digital health interventions they champion. This case justifies recent calls for more deliberate explorations within global health scholarships and practice, of synergies between law and health.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8805250
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88052502022-02-03 Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool Mureyi, Dudzai BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Research BACKGROUND: The deployment of digital health systems may be impeded by barriers that are, or are linked to underlying enduring institutions. Attempting to challenge the barriers without addressing the underpinning institution may be ineffective. This study reflects on ways actors may surmount institutionalised barriers to the uptake of digital tools in health systems. METHODS: I applied Institutional theory concepts to an autoethnographic case study of efforts to introduce a digital tool to provide citizens with medicines information. RESULTS: The tool’s uptake was impeded because of state regulators’ institutionalised interpretation of pharmaceutical advertising laws, which rendered the tool illegal. I, along with allies beyond the health sector, successfully challenged the regulators’ institutionalised interpretation of pharmaceutical advertising laws through various actions. These actions included: framing the tool as legal and constitutional, litigation, and redefining these concepts: ‘advertising’, ‘health institution’, and the role of regulatory bodies vis a vis innovation. CONCLUSION: After identifying a barrier as being institutionalised or linked to an institution, actors might challenge such barriers by engaging in institutional work; i.e. deliberate efforts to challenge the relevant institution (e.g. a law, norm or shared belief). Institutional work may require the actions of multiple actors within and beyond the health sector, including judicial actors. Such cross-sectoral alliances are efficacious because they provide institutional workers with a broader range of strategies, framings, concepts and forums with which to challenge institutionalised barriers. However, actors beyond the health system (e.g. the judiciary) must be inquisitive about the potential implications of the digital health interventions they champion. This case justifies recent calls for more deliberate explorations within global health scholarships and practice, of synergies between law and health. BioMed Central 2022-01-31 /pmc/articles/PMC8805250/ /pubmed/35101019 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01769-x Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Mureyi, Dudzai
Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool
title Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool
title_full Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool
title_fullStr Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool
title_full_unstemmed Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool
title_short Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool
title_sort overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: an autoethnographic case study of the judicialization of a digital health tool
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8805250/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35101019
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12911-022-01769-x
work_keys_str_mv AT mureyidudzai overcominginstitutionalisedbarrierstodigitalhealthsystemsanautoethnographiccasestudyofthejudicializationofadigitalhealthtool