ArticleBMC health services research2022
Linking resilience and regulation across system levels in healthcare - a multilevel study.
Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Financing Regimes and Case-Mix Complexity in Psychiatric Hospitals Beyond the Pandemic Shock-Insights from a Regional European Healthcare System.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Sex, drugs and rock 'n' roll: the only reasons for regulators to target individuals.BMJ quality & safety · 2024Article
- Article
- Influence of external assessment on quality and safety in surgery: a qualitative study of surgeons' perspectives.BMJ open quality · 2024Article
- Exploring homecare leaders' risk perception and the link to resilience and adaptive capacity: a multiple case study.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- External inspection approaches and involvement of stakeholders' views in inspection following serious incidents - a qualitative mixed methods study from the perspectives of regulatory inspectors.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Identifying, categorising, and mapping actors involved in resilience in healthcare: a qualitative stakeholder analysis.BMC health services research · 2024Article
- Room for resilience: a qualitative study about accountability mechanisms in the relation between work-as-done (WAD) and work-as-imagined (WAI) in hospitals.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Slack in the infrastructure of intensive care units: resilience management in the post-pandemic era.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Learning from experience: a qualitative study of surgeons' perspectives on reporting and dealing with serious adverse events.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- Unfolding alignment - How top management work to align demand and capacity: an ethnographic study of resilience in a Swedish healthcare region.BMC health services research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Quality Improvement Regulation was introduced to the Norwegian healthcare system in 2017 as a new national regulatory framework to support local quality and safety efforts in hospitals. A research-based response to this, was to develop a study with the overall research question: How does a new healthcare regulation implemented across three system levels contribute to adaptive capacity in hospital management of quality and safety? Based on development and implementation of the Quality Improvement Regulation, this study aims to synthesize findings across macro, meso, and micro-levels in the Norwegian healthcare system.
methodsThe multilevel embedded case study collected data by documents and interviews. A synthesizing approach to findings across subunits was applied in legal dogmatic and qualitative content analysis.
settingthree governmental macro-level bodies, three meso-level County Governors and three micro-level hospitals.
participantsseven macro-level regulators, 12 meso-level chief county medical officers/inspectors and 20 micro-level hospital managers/quality advisers.
resultsBased on a multilevel investigation, three themes were discovered. All system levels considered the Quality Improvement Regulation to facilitate adaptive capacity and recognized contextual flexibility as an important regulatory feature. Participants agreed on uncertainty and variation to hamper the ability to plan and anticipate risk. However, findings identified conflicting views amongst inspectors and hospital managers about their collaboration, with different perceptions of the impact of external inspection. The study found no changes in management- or clinical practices, nor substantial change in the external inspection approach due to the new regulatory framework.
conclusionsThe Quality Improvement Regulation facilitates adaptive capacity, contradicting the assumption that regulation and resilience are "hopeless opposites". However, governmental expectations to implementation and external inspection were not fully linked with changes in hospital management. Thus, the study identified a missing link in the current regime. We suggest that macro, meso and micro-levels should be considered collaborative partners in obtaining system-wide adaptive capacity, to ensure efficient risk regulation in quality improvement and patient safety processes. Further studies on regulatory processes could explore how hospital management and implementation are influenced by regulators', inspectors', and managers' professional backgrounds, positions, and daily trade-offs to adapt to changes and maintain high quality care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.