IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Conferences, tablecloths and cupboards: How to understand the situatedness of quality improvements in long-term care

  • Stoopendaal, Annemiek
  • Bal, Roland
Registered author(s):

    Long term care needs improvement, but still little is known how quality improvement works in practice. A better, in-depth, understanding of the content and complexities of quality improvement is necessary because of the still limited theoretical and empirical grounds underlying its approach. This article draws on empirical material from Care for Better, a national quality improvement collaborative (QIC) for the long-term care sector in the Netherlands that took place from 2005 until 2012. Following a project on prevention of malnutrition, we analyzed the complex and ongoing processes of embedding improvements. The guiding question for our research was: what must be accomplished to enable and sustain improvements to occur in the everyday life of care organizations? In our analysis, we linked ethnographic findings to Actor Network Theory. We found that different kinds of work had to be done by both human and non-human actors to displace improvements into specific organizational situations. We conceptualized this work as the activity of translation. Moreover, the concept of inscription offers a perspective to reveal how improvements are made durable. Inscriptions are translations of values into texts, behavior or materialities that steer action in a specific way. We analyzed three different modes of inscription: gathering, materializing and training. We analyzed how one specific value, patient choice, became inscribed in different ways, configuring the actors in specific ways, with diverging consequences for how patient choice comes about.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795361200799X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Social Science & Medicine.

    Volume (Year): 78 (2013)
    Issue (Month): C ()
    Pages: 78-85

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:78:y:2013:i:c:p:78-85
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.11.037
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description

    Order Information: Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
    Web: http://www.elsevier.com/orderme/journalorderform.cws_home/315/journalorderform1/orderooc/id=654&ref=654_01_ooc_1&version=01

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Zuiderent-Jerak, Teun & Strating, Mathilde & Nieboer, Anna & Bal, Roland, 2009. "Sociological refigurations of patient safety; ontologies of improvement and 'acting with' quality collaboratives in healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1713-1721, December.
    2. Greenhalgh, Trisha & Stones, Rob, 2010. "Theorising big IT programmes in healthcare: Strong structuration theory meets actor-network theory," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1285-1294, May.
    3. Dixon, Anna & Robertson, Ruth & Bal, Roland, 2010. "The experience of implementing choice at point of referral: a comparison of the Netherlands and England," Health Economics, Policy and Law, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(03), pages 295-317, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:78:y:2013:i:c:p:78-85. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.