Cited by 89Clinical practice guidelines implementationHealth Policy Implementation ScienceHealthcare Quality and Management

Pathways to professionalism? Quality improvement, care pathways, and the interplay of standardisation and clinical autonomy

Open access
Martin, Graham P., Kocman, David, Stephens, Timothy, Peden, Carol J., Pearse, Rupert M., This study was carried out as part of a wider randomised controlled trial, EPOCH·2017·Sociology of Health & Illness

Abstract

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 standardisation. This qualitative study examined the adoption and adaptation of a novel pathway as part of a randomised 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‐realised 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.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1467-9566.12585

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 33 · Cited by 89

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Allen, D. (2010) Care pathways: An ethnographic description of the field, International Journal of Care Pathways, 14, 1, 4-9.
  2. Allen, D. and Rixson, L. (2008) How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integra- tion in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect? International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 6, 1, 78-110.
  3. Clarke, A., Murdoch, H., Thomas, M.J., Cook, T.M., et al. (2011) Mortality and postoperative care after emergency laparotomy, European Journal of Anaesthesiology, 28, 1, 16-9.
  4. Dixon-Woods, M., Bosk, C.L., Aveling, E.-L., Goeschel, C.A., et al. (2011) Explaining Michigan: Devel- oping an ex post theory of a patient safety program, Milbank Quarterly, 89, 2, 167-205.
  5. Hunter, B. and Segrott, J. (2008) Re-mapping client journeys and professional identities: A review of the literature on clinical pathways, International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45, 4, 608-25.
  6. Martin, G.P., Armstrong, N., Aveling, E.-L., Herbert, G., et al. (2015) Professionalism redundant, reshaped, or reinvigorated? Realizing the 'third logic' in contemporary health care, Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 56, 3, 378-97.
  7. Martin, G.P., Ozieranski, P., Willars, J., Charles, K., et al. (2014) Walkrounds in practice: Corrupting or enhancing a quality improvement intervention? A qualitative study, Joint Commission Journal on Qual- ity and Patient Safety, 40, 7, 303-10.
  8. Nicolay, C.R., Purkayastha, S., Greenhalgh, A., Benn, J., et al. (2012) Systematic review of the applica- tion of quality improvement methodologies from the manufacturing industry to surgical healthcare, Bri- tish Journal of Surgery, 99, 3, 324-35.
  9. Noordegraaf, M. (2015) Hybrid professionalism and beyond: (New) forms of public professionalism in changing organizational and societal contexts, Journal of Professions and Organization, 2, 2, 187-206.
  10. Numerato, D., Salvatore, D. and Fattore, G. (2012) The impact of management on medical professional- ism: a review, Sociology of Health & Illness, 34, 4, 626-44.
  11. Pearsall, E.A., Meghji, Z., Pitzul, K.B., Aarts, M.-A., et al. (2015) A qualitative study to understand the barriers and enablers in implementing an enhanced recovery after surgery program, Annals of Surgery, 261, 1, 92-6.
  12. Rycroft-Malone, J., Fontenla, M., Seers, K. and Bick, D. (2009) Protocol-based care: The standardisation of decision-making? Journal of Clinical Nursing, 18, 10, 1490-500.
  13. Schrijvers, G., van Hoorn, A. and Huiskes, N. (2012) The care pathway: Concepts and theories. An intro- duction, International Journal of Integrated Care, 12, 6, 1-7.
  14. Waring, J., Allen, D., Braithwaite, J. and Sandall, J. (2016) Healthcare quality and safety: A review of policy, practice and research, Sociology of Health & Illness, 38, 2, 198-215.

Authors
Martin, G. P., Kocman, D., Stephens, T., Peden, C. J., Pearse, R. M., & This study was carried out as part of a wider randomised controlled trial, E.
Affiliations
  • University of Leicester (GB)
  • Critical Care and Peri‐operative Medicine Research Group Queen Mary University of London UK
  • University of Southern California (US)
  • Queen Mary University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Martin, Graham P.
Venue
Sociology of Health & Illness
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-06-21
Volume
39
Issue
8
Pages
1314-1329
ISSN
  • 0141-9889 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-9566
OpenAlex
W2609886869
Cited by
89
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1
FWCI
8.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sociology of Health & Illness (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Apollo (cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institute for Health Research (grant number 12/5005/10)
  • East Midlands Development Agency
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Healthcare Quality and Management
Keywords
care pathways, quality improvement, professionalism, standardization, clinical autonomy, managerialism, emergency general surgery, perioperative care, professional judgment, interprofessional collaboration, professional resistance, care pathway implementation
MeSH terms
Professionalism, Clinical Competence, Emergency Service, Hospital, United Kingdom, Health Personnel, Humans, Laparotomy, General Surgery, Professional Autonomy, Qualitative Research, Quality Improvement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review