posted on 2017-03-08, 10:05authored byGraham P. Martin, David Kocman, Timothy Stephens, Carol J. Peden, Rupert M. Pearse
Care pathways are a prominent feature of efforts to improve healthcare quality, outcomes and
accountability, but sociological studies of pathways often find professional resistance to
standardization. This qualitative study examined the adoption and adaptation of a novel
pathway as part of a randomized controlled trial in an unusually complex, non-linear field—
emergency general surgery—by teams of surgeons and physicians in six theoretically sampled
sites in the UK. We find near-universal receptivity to the concept of a pathway as a means of
improving peri-operative processes and outcomes, but concern about the impact on appropriate
professional judgement. However, this concern translated not into resistance and
implementation failure, but into a nuancing of the pathways-as-realized in each site, and their
use as a means of enhancing professional decision-making and inter-professional collaboration.
We discuss our findings in the context of recent literature on the interplay between
managerialism and professionalism in healthcare, and highlight practical and theoretical
implications.
Funding
This research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) programme (grant number 12/5005/10). Graham Martin’s contribution to the research was also supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East Midlands (CLAHRC EM).
History
Citation
Sociology of Health and Illness, 2017
Author affiliation
/Organisation/COLLEGE OF MEDICINE, BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND PSYCHOLOGY/School of Medicine/Department of Health Sciences
Version
VoR (Version of Record)
Published in
Sociology of Health and Illness
Publisher
Wiley for Foundation for the Sociology of Health and Illness