Abstract
Despite committed policy, regulative and professional efforts on healthcare safety, little is known about how such macro-interventions permeate organisations and shape culture over time. Informed by neo-institutional theory, we examined how inter-organisational influences shaped safety practices and inter-subjective meanings following efforts for coerced culture change. We traced macro-influences from 2000 to 2015 in infection prevention and control (IPC). Safety perceptions and meanings were inductively analysed from 130 in-depth qualitative interviews with senior- and middle-level managers from 30 English hospitals. A total of 869 institutional interventions were identified; 69% had a regulative component. In this context of forced implementation of safety practices, staff experienced inherent tensions concerning the scope of safety, their ability to be open and prioritisation of external mandates over local need. These tensions stemmed from conflicts among three co-existing institutional logics prevalent in the NHS. In response to requests for change, staff flexibly drew from a repertoire of cognitive, material and symbolic resources within and outside their organisations. They crafted ‘strategies of action’, guided by a situated assessment of first-hand practice experiences complementing collective evaluations of interventions such as ‘pragmatic’, ‘sensible’ and also ‘legitimate’. Macro-institutional forces exerted influence either directly on individuals or indirectly by enriching the organisational cultural repertoire.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1138-1158 |
Number of pages | 21 |
Journal | Sociology of Health and Illness |
Volume | 41 |
Issue number | 6 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 1 Jul 2019 |
Externally published | Yes |
Funding
This article represents independent research that was partially funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, in partnership with Public Health England (PHE) in collaboration with The Sanger Institute, the University of Cambridge Veterinary School and Imperial College Health Partners. ECS acknowledges the support of the NIHR Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre. RAh is supported by an NIHR Fellowship in Knowledge Mobilisation. AH is a NIHR Senior Investigator. The support of ESRC as part of the Antimicrobial Cross Council initiative supported by the seven UK research councils, and also the support of the Global Challenges Research Fund, is gratefully acknowledged. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. We thank Kyriakos Hatzaras for his contribution in conducting qualitative interviews.
Funders | Funder number |
---|---|
Imperial College Health Partners | |
Sanger Institute | |
University of Cambridge Veterinary School | |
Economic and Social Research Council | ES/P008313/1 |
National Institute for Health and Care Research | |
Imperial College London | |
Public Health England | |
Patient Safety Translational Research Centre | |
seven UK research councils |
Keywords
- infection prevention and control
- neo-institutional theory
- patient safety
- safety culture