IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v119y2015i6p821-830.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The use of mystery guests by the Dutch Health Inspectorate: Results of a pilot study in long-term intramural elderly care

Author

Listed:
  • Adams, Samantha A.
  • Paul, Katharina T.
  • Ketelaars, Corry
  • Robben, Paul

Abstract

This paper examines the use of ‘mystery guests’ as an instrument for monitoring quality and safety in healthcare. The Dutch Health Inspectorate initiated a mystery guest pilot project in elderly care as a response to political and social pressure. An independent evaluation of this project revealed that the primary goal of this approach – to provide a better view of the exigencies of daily practice in elderly care – was not met. Inspectors did not use the information delivered by the mystery guests because how they evaluated quality and reported findings did not align with practices used by the health inspectorate. Additionally, the inspectors felt that other instruments being developed were more appropriate for providing a better view of practice. While political pressure is important for effecting change in general, the specific instruments to be used for formal supervision of health institutions should be developed and implemented within the organization in accordance with existing standards and approaches. The choice to implement a new supervision instrument, including sending mystery guests into care institutions, should be preceded by an ethical analysis that takes into account the specific context of its use.

Suggested Citation

  • Adams, Samantha A. & Paul, Katharina T. & Ketelaars, Corry & Robben, Paul, 2015. "The use of mystery guests by the Dutch Health Inspectorate: Results of a pilot study in long-term intramural elderly care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(6), pages 821-830.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:119:y:2015:i:6:p:821-830
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.02.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851015000536
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.02.008?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Braithwaite & Toni Makkai & Valerie Braithwaite, 2007. "Regulating Aged Care," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 12540.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. de Graaff, M.B. & Stoopendaal, A. & Leistikow, I., 2019. "Transforming clients into experts-by-experience: A pilot in client participation in Dutch long-term elderly care homes inspectorate supervision," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(3), pages 275-280.
    2. Roland Cheo & Ge Ge & Geir Godager & Rugang Liu & Jian Wang & Qiqi Wang, 2020. "The effect of a mystery shopper scheme on prescribing behavior in primary care: Results from a field experiment," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, December.
    3. Schichel, Mignon C.P. & Veenstra, Marja Y. & Kempen, Gertrudis I.J.M. & de Vugt, Marjolein E. & van der Zanden, Brigitte A.M. & Verhey, Frans R.J., 2020. "Senior Friendly Communities: Designing an approach for cross-border exchange of public health policy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(10), pages 1129-1136.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna Hutchens, 2011. "Playing games of governance: How and why Fair Trade pioneers evade corporate capture," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 221-240, June.
    2. Kristina Murphy & Tom R. Tyler & Amy Curtis, 2009. "Nurturing regulatory compliance: Is procedural justice effective when people question the legitimacy of the law?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(1), pages 1-26, March.
    3. John Braithwaite & Seung‐Hun Hong, 2015. "The iteration deficit in responsive regulation: Are regulatory ambassadors an answer?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 16-29, March.
    4. Kristina Murphy, 2016. "Turning defiance into compliance with procedural justice: Understanding reactions to regulatory encounters through motivational posturing," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 93-109, March.
    5. Marcio Iorio Aranha, 2016. "Telecommunications Regulatory Design in Brazil: Networking around State Capacity Deficits," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2016(2), pages 83-105.
    6. Sarah Kaine & Jenny Green, 2013. "Outing the Silent Partner: Espousing the Economic Values that Operate in Not-For-Profit Organizations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(1), pages 215-225, November.
    7. Bomhoff, Manja & Friele, Roland, 2017. "Complaints in long-term care facilities for older persons: Why residents do not give ‘free advice’," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 75-81.
    8. Peter Mascini, 2013. "Why was the enforcement pyramid so influential? And what price was paid?," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 48-60, March.
    9. Vibeke Lehmann Nielsen & Christine Parker, 2009. "Testing responsive regulation in regulatory enforcement," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(4), pages 376-399, December.
    10. Skinnars Josefsson, Malin & Nydahl, Margaretha & Persson, Inger & Mattsson Sydner, Ylva, 2019. "Adherence to a regulation that aims to prevent and treat malnutrition—The case of Swedish elderly care," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(7), pages 688-694.
    11. John Braithwaite, 2013. "Relational republican regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 124-144, March.
    12. Anne Daly & Tesfaye Gebremedhin & Muhammad Sayem, 2013. "A Case Study of Affirmative Action Australian-style for Indigenous People," Australian Journal of Labour Economics (AJLE), Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre (BCEC), Curtin Business School, vol. 16(2), pages 277-294.
    13. Jeroen van der Heijden, 2021. "Why meta‐research matters to regulation and governance scholarship: An illustrative evidence synthesis of responsive regulation research," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(S1), pages 123-142, November.
    14. Kitov Yael Aloni & Neagoe Alexandru, 2022. "The Social Worker and Change: Obstacle or Opportunity?," European Review of Applied Sociology, Sciendo, vol. 15(25), pages 34-47, December.
    15. Stephen Davey & Carol Richards, 2013. "Supermarkets and private standards: unintended consequences of the audit ritual," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 30(2), pages 271-281, June.
    16. Christine Parker, 2013. "Twenty years of responsive regulation: An appreciation and appraisal," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(1), pages 2-13, March.
    17. Cameron Parsell, 2016. "Surveillance in supportive housing: Intrusion or autonomy?," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(15), pages 3189-3205, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:119:y:2015:i:6:p:821-830. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.