Mirjam Kalisvaart, Lieke Oldenhof, Roland Bal, Anne Margriet Pot
{"title":"以人为本的开放标准如何在监管实践中再次成为清单:潜在机制解释","authors":"Mirjam Kalisvaart, Lieke Oldenhof, Roland Bal, Anne Margriet Pot","doi":"10.1111/rego.70075","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In health care regulation, open outcome‐oriented standards are used to provide flexibility for care organizations to determine how to deal with complex issues. What remains understudied is how this works out in practice. This paper studies how inspectors use open standards to regulate the complex issue of person‐centered care. An exploratory qualitative multiple‐method design was used to study the work of inspectors who assess the quality of nursing homes within the Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate. Five mechanisms were found that hamper the assessment of open outcome‐oriented standards for person‐centered care: difficulties in triangulating information, estimating the reliability of the information, deviating from the schedule of the inspection program, judging direct care provision negatively, and indicating a clear boundary between sufficient and insufficient. When using open outcome‐oriented standards, it is important to reflect on these mechanisms and evaluate whether outcomes still align with the societal values they attempt to regulate.","PeriodicalId":21026,"journal":{"name":"Regulation & Governance","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Open Standards for Person‐Centered Care Become Checklists Again in Regulatory Practice: Underlying Mechanisms Explained\",\"authors\":\"Mirjam Kalisvaart, Lieke Oldenhof, Roland Bal, Anne Margriet Pot\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/rego.70075\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In health care regulation, open outcome‐oriented standards are used to provide flexibility for care organizations to determine how to deal with complex issues. What remains understudied is how this works out in practice. This paper studies how inspectors use open standards to regulate the complex issue of person‐centered care. An exploratory qualitative multiple‐method design was used to study the work of inspectors who assess the quality of nursing homes within the Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate. Five mechanisms were found that hamper the assessment of open outcome‐oriented standards for person‐centered care: difficulties in triangulating information, estimating the reliability of the information, deviating from the schedule of the inspection program, judging direct care provision negatively, and indicating a clear boundary between sufficient and insufficient. When using open outcome‐oriented standards, it is important to reflect on these mechanisms and evaluate whether outcomes still align with the societal values they attempt to regulate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21026,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulation & Governance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70075\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation & Governance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.70075","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
How Open Standards for Person‐Centered Care Become Checklists Again in Regulatory Practice: Underlying Mechanisms Explained
In health care regulation, open outcome‐oriented standards are used to provide flexibility for care organizations to determine how to deal with complex issues. What remains understudied is how this works out in practice. This paper studies how inspectors use open standards to regulate the complex issue of person‐centered care. An exploratory qualitative multiple‐method design was used to study the work of inspectors who assess the quality of nursing homes within the Dutch Health and Youth Care Inspectorate. Five mechanisms were found that hamper the assessment of open outcome‐oriented standards for person‐centered care: difficulties in triangulating information, estimating the reliability of the information, deviating from the schedule of the inspection program, judging direct care provision negatively, and indicating a clear boundary between sufficient and insufficient. When using open outcome‐oriented standards, it is important to reflect on these mechanisms and evaluate whether outcomes still align with the societal values they attempt to regulate.
期刊介绍:
Regulation & Governance serves as the leading platform for the study of regulation and governance by political scientists, lawyers, sociologists, historians, criminologists, psychologists, anthropologists, economists and others. Research on regulation and governance, once fragmented across various disciplines and subject areas, has emerged at the cutting edge of paradigmatic change in the social sciences. Through the peer-reviewed journal Regulation & Governance, we seek to advance discussions between various disciplines about regulation and governance, promote the development of new theoretical and empirical understanding, and serve the growing needs of practitioners for a useful academic reference.