IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reensy/v125y2014icp134-144.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Applying different quality and safety models in healthcare improvement work: Boundary objects and system thinking

Author

Listed:
  • Wiig, Siri
  • Robert, Glenn
  • Anderson, Janet E.
  • Pietikainen, Elina
  • Reiman, Teemu
  • Macchi, Luigi
  • Aase, Karina

Abstract

A number of theoretical models can be applied to help guide quality improvement and patient safety interventions in hospitals. However there are often significant differences between such models and, therefore, their potential contribution when applied in diverse contexts. The aim of this paper is to explore how two such models have been applied by hospitals to improve quality and safety. We describe and compare the models: (1) The Organizing for Quality (OQ) model, and (2) the Design for Integrated Safety Culture (DISC) model. We analyze the theoretical foundations of the models, and show, by using a retrospective comparative case study approach from two European hospitals, how these models have been applied to improve quality and safety. The analysis shows that differences appear in the theoretical foundations, practical approaches and applications of the models. Nevertheless, the case studies indicate that the choice between the OQ and DISC models is of less importance for guiding the practice of quality and safety improvement work, as they are both systemic and share some important characteristics. The main contribution of the models lay in their role as boundary objects directing attention towards organizational and systems thinking, culture, and collaboration.

Suggested Citation

  • Wiig, Siri & Robert, Glenn & Anderson, Janet E. & Pietikainen, Elina & Reiman, Teemu & Macchi, Luigi & Aase, Karina, 2014. "Applying different quality and safety models in healthcare improvement work: Boundary objects and system thinking," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 134-144.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:reensy:v:125:y:2014:i:c:p:134-144
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2014.01.008
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095183201400009X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ress.2014.01.008?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. Allen, Davina, 2009. "From boundary concept to boundary object: The practice and politics of care pathway development," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 354-361, August.
    2. Waring, Justin & Currie, Graeme & Crompton, Amanda & Bishop, Simon, 2013. "An exploratory study of knowledge brokering in hospital settings: Facilitating knowledge sharing and learning for patient safety?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 79-86.
    3. Reiman, Teemu & Rollenhagen, Carl, 2011. "Human and organizational biases affecting the management of safety," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 96(10), pages 1263-1274.
    4. Frank W. Geels, 2005. "Technological Transitions and System Innovations," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 3576.
    5. Mackintosh, Nicola & Sandall, Jane, 2010. "Overcoming gendered and professional hierarchies in order to facilitate escalation of care in emergency situations: The role of standardised communication protocols," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(9), pages 1683-1686, November.
    6. Gerring, John, 2004. "What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 341-354, May.
    7. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    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. Hernandez-Perdomo, Elvis & Guney, Yilmaz & Rocco, Claudio M., 2019. "A reliability model for assessing corporate governance using machine learning techniques," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 220-231.

    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. Callum J Gunn & Sevgi E & Teresa Finlay & Lidewij Eva & Teun Zuiderent-Jerak & Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar, 2023. "Co-design and its consequences: developing a shared patient engagement framework in the IMI-PARADIGM project," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 50(6), pages 1018-1028.
    2. Omid Omidvar & Roman Kislov, 2016. "R&D Consortia As Boundary Organisations: Misalignment And Asymmetry Of Boundary Management," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-24, February.
    3. Sajtos, Laszlo & Rouse, Paul & Harrison, Julie & Parsons, Matthew, 2014. "Case-mix system as a boundary object: the case of home care services," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 189-196.
    4. Krafft, Manfred & Sajtos, Laszlo & Haenlein, Michael, 2020. "Challenges and Opportunities for Marketing Scholars in Times of the Fourth Industrial Revolution," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-8.
    5. Melo, Sara & Bishop, Simon, 2020. "Translating healthcare research evidence into practice: The role of linked boundary objects," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    6. Standing, Holly & Patterson, Rebecca & Dalkin, Sonia & Exley, Catherine & Brittain, Katie, 2020. "A critical exploration of professional jurisdictions and role boundaries in inter-professional end-of-life care in the community," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    7. Jessica Weber, 2023. "Coordination Challenges in Wind Energy Development: Lessons from Cross-Case Positive Planning Approaches to Avoid Multi-Level Governance ‘Free-Riding’," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-25, October.
    8. Meinel, Martin & Eismann, Tobias T. & Baccarella, Christian V. & Fixson, Sebastian K. & Voigt, Kai-Ingo, 2020. "Does applying design thinking result in better new product concepts than a traditional innovation approach? An experimental comparison study," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 661-671.
    9. Michael Kaethler, 2019. "Curating creative communities of practice: the role of ambiguity," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Andersson, Ulf & Dasí, Àngels & Mudambi, Ram & Pedersen, Torben, 2016. "Technology, innovation and knowledge: The importance of ideas and international connectivity," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 153-162.
    11. Yuchen Zhang & Wei Yang, 2022. "Breakthrough invention and problem complexity: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2510-2544, December.
    12. Andersson Fredrik O. & Ford Michael, 2017. "Entry Barriers and Nonprofit Founding Rates: An Examination of the Milwaukee Voucher School Population," Nonprofit Policy Forum, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 71-90, January.
    13. Okereke, Chukwumerije & Coke, Alexia & Geebreyesus, Mulu & Ginbo, Tsegaye & Wakeford, Jeremy J. & Mulugetta, Yacob, 2019. "Governing green industrialisation in Africa: Assessing key parameters for a sustainable socio-technical transition in the context of Ethiopia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 279-290.
    14. Gustav Lidén, 2013. "What about theory? The consequences on a widened perspective of social theory," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 213-225, January.
    15. Daniele T. P. Souza & Eugenia A. Kuhn & Arjen E. J. Wals & Pedro R. Jacobi, 2020. "Learning in, with, and through the Territory: Territory-Based Learning as a Catalyst for Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Avelino, Flor & Wittmayer, Julia M. & Pel, Bonno & Weaver, Paul & Dumitru, Adina & Haxeltine, Alex & Kemp, René & Jørgensen, Michael S. & Bauler, Tom & Ruijsink, Saskia & O'Riordan, Tim, 2019. "Transformative social innovation and (dis)empowerment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 195-206.
    17. Swan, Jacky & Goussevskaia, Anna & Newell, Sue & Robertson, Maxine & Bresnen, Mike & Obembe, Ademola, 2007. "Modes of organizing biomedical innovation in the UK and US and the role of integrative and relational capabilities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 529-547, May.
    18. Wertheim-Heck, Sigrid C.O. & Vellema, Sietze & Spaargaren, Gert, 2015. "Food safety and urban food markets in Vietnam: The need for flexible and customized retail modernization policies," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 95-106.
    19. Matthew Hawkins, 2018. "Researching and marketing to consumption collectives," Post-Print hal-01809954, HAL.
    20. Colvin, John & Blackmore, Chris & Chimbuya, Sam & Collins, Kevin & Dent, Mark & Goss, John & Ison, Ray & Roggero, Pier Paolo & Seddaiu, Giovanna, 2014. "In search of systemic innovation for sustainable development: A design praxis emerging from a decade of social learning inquiry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 760-771.

    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:reensy:v:125:y:2014:i:c:p:134-144. 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 (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/reliability-engineering-and-system-safety .

    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.