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

Adams, Samantha; Ketelaars, Corry A.J.; Robben, Paul

doi:10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.02.008

Cited by 18 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 14 publications

(16 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The espoused reasons are similar for the input they provide during thematic inspections (17). Similarly, experts-by-experience can provide important knowledge as they are more able to tap into experiences of patients, especially in the case of sensitive subjects such as alcohol misuse amongst adolescents (12,15,40,41). Experts-by-experience and related methods also offer another view on quality of care by focusing more on relations and 'softer' aspects of service provision (such as quality of the food, time spent outside, decorative aspects of living facilities) rather than concentrating on safety (15, 42 43, 44, 45).…”

Section: Collective Proactive Methods Of Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Along with the possible bene ts reported above, the results also show a number of di culties experienced by regulators when putting involvement into practice. First, it can prove di cult to incorporate the input of patients and families into the decisions or reports of the regulator (6,15,16,23,31,39). This has partly to do with the perceived lack of legitimacy of patient or family input.…”

Section: Reported DI Culties Concerning Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A case study across four countries

Wiig

Rutz

Boyd

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: In the regulation of healthcare, the subject of patient and family involvement figures increasingly prominently on the agenda. However, the literature on involving patients and families in regulation is still in its infancy. A systematic analysis of how patient and family involvement in regulation is accomplished across different health systems is lacking. We provide such an overview by mapping and classifying methods of patient and family involvement in regulatory practice in four countries; Norway, England, the Netherlands, and Australia. We thus provide a knowledge base that enables discussions about possible types of involvement, and advantages and difficulties of involvement encountered in practice. Methods: The research design was a multiple case study of patient and family involvement in regulation in four countries. The authors collected 1) academic literature if available and 2) documents of regulators that describe user involvement. Based on the data collected, the authors from each country completed a pre-agreed template to describe the involvement methods. The following information was extracted and included where available: 1) Method of involvement, 2) Type of regulatory activity, 3) Purpose of involvement, 4) Who is involved and 5) Lessons learnt.Results: Our mapping of involvement strategies showed a range of methods being used in regulation, which we classified into four categories: individual proactive, individual reactive, collective proactive, and collective reactive methods. Reported advantages included: increased quality of regulation, increased legitimacy, perceived justice for those affected, and empowerment. Difficulties were also reported concerning: how to incorporate the input of users in decisions, the fact that not all users want to be involved, time and costs required, organizational procedures standing in the way of involvement, and dealing with emotions. Conclusions: Our mapping of user involvement strategies establishes a broad variety of ways to involve patients and families. The four categories can serve as inspiration to regulators in healthcare. The paper shows that stimulating involvement in regulation is a challenging and complex task. The fact that regulators are experimenting with different methods can be viewed positively in this regard.

show abstract

Section: Collective Proactive Methods Of Involvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reported DI Culties Concerning Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A case study across four countries

Wiig

Rutz

Boyd

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Along with the possible benefits reported above, the results also show a number of difficulties experienced by regulators when putting involvement into practice. First, it can prove difficult to incorporate the input of patients and families into the decisions or reports of the regulator (6,15,16,23,31,39). This has partly to do with the perceived lack of legitimacy of patient or family input.…”

Section: Reported Difficulties Concerning Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A case study across four countries

Wiig

Rutz

Boyd

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In healthcare regulation, the subject of patient and family involvement figures increasingly prominently on the agenda. However, the literature on involving patient and families in regulation is still in its infancy. A systematic analysis of how patient and family involvement in regulation is accomplished across different health systems is lacking. We provide such an overview by mapping and classifying methods of patient and family involvement in regulatory practice in four countries; Norway, England, the Netherlands, and Australia. We thus provide a knowledge base that enables discussions about possible types of involvement, and advantages and difficulties of involvement encountered in practice.Methods The research design was a multiple case study of patient and family involvement in regulation in four countries. The authors collected 1) academic literature if available and 2) documents of regulators that describe user involvement. Based on the data collected, the authors from each country completed a pre-agreed template to describe the involvement methods. The following information was extracted and included if available: 1) Method of involvement, 2) Type of regulatory activity, 3) Purpose of involvement, 4) Who is involved and 5) Lessons learnt.Results Our mapping of involvement methods showed a range of methods being used in regulation, which we classified into four categories: individual proactive, individual reactive, collective proactive, and collective reactive methods. Reported advantages include: increased quality of regulation, increased legitimacy, perceived justice for those affected, and empowerment. Difficulties were also reported concerning: how to incorporate the input of users in decisions, the fact that not all users want to be involved, time and costs required, organizational procedures standing in the way of involvement, and dealing with emotions.Conclusions Our mapping of user involvement methods found a broad variety of involvement methods. These can serve as inspiration to regulators in healthcare. The paper shows that making involvement in regulation successful is a challenging and complex task. The fact that regulators are experimenting with different methods can be valued positively in this regard.

show abstract

“…She made a point of working in multiple settings, ranging from hospitals, general practitioner (GP) offices, clinics, social media sites, and various online environments. 3 Sam sought to link the real world with the academic world, and was also sought out for precisely this ability. Most recently she had taken on a project with colleagues at TILT to explore ethical and societal aspects of a sewage surveillance system aimed at detecting synthetic drug production through wastewater analysis, adding yet another dimension to her surveillance studies perspective.…”

Section: Beyond the Clinicmentioning

confidence: 99%

Samantha Adams Festschrift: The Dot at the End of the Funnel—TILT Remembers Samantha Adams

Pierce¹,

Suman²,

Koops³

et al. 2018

Appl Clin Inform

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When colleagues at The Tilburg Institute for Law, Technology, and Society (TILT) learned of Samantha Adam's death, the shock and sadness unfolded on multiple levels. Sam, as she was known by everyone, had been at TILT for 4 years and, in that time, had become a beloved colleague and friend to many, as well as the leading force and driver for the development of a dedicated health research line at TILT. Sam was in the process of bringing the many strands of her work together from a research and teaching career that explored issues in health through the lens of Science Technology and Society studies (STS), Health Policy, and Medical Informatics. Sam had decided that eHealth would be the umbrella under which she would integrate her research and teaching. Consequently, when she came to TILT, her longstanding interest in medical informatics and online health research readily and naturally transformed into the launch of a rapidly developing research line on eHealth. 1 But as Sam was always quick to point out, "eHealth is not 'one thing'!" "You really cannot talk about the regulation of eHealth or the ethics of eHealthit involves a vast array of different technologies giving rise to different issues." Although we shared this understanding, it was clear that this had become one of Sam's rallying cries, a pet peeve. But at the root of this annoyance was the fact that, as Sam pointed out, not getting your foundational terms right at the outset will significantly lower the depth, quality, and value of the analysis that could be done as a result. It was this kind of insistence on intellectual integrity that guided Sam's work. Some may have experienced it as stubbornness, but the result was indisputable-Sam's research foundations were solid.

show abstract

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

Cited by 18 publications

References 14 publications

What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A case study across four countries

What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A case study across four countries

What methods are used to promote patient and family involvement in healthcare regulation? A case study across four countries

Samantha Adams Festschrift: The Dot at the End of the Funnel—TILT Remembers Samantha Adams

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About