The policy‐practice nexus of electronic health records adoption in the UK NHS

Abstract

PurposeThis paper seeks to report the findings from a seven‐year study on the UK National Health Service on the introduction of an electronic health record for 50 million citizens. It explores the relationship between policy and practice in the introduction of a large‐scale national ICT programme at an estimated value of £12.4bn.Design/methodology/approachUsing a longitudinal research method, data are collected on the policy‐practice nexus. The paper applies institutional theory using a conceptual model by Tolbert and Zucker on the component processes of institutionalisation.FindingsThe findings suggest that institutional forces act as a driver and an inhibitor to introducing enabling technologies in the health‐care environment. A process analysis shows that, as electronic health records force disruptive change on clinicians, healthcare managers and patients, culturally embedded norms, values and behavioural patterns serve to impede the implementation process.Research limitations/implicationsThis research is limited in its generalisability to national, regional and local ICT implementations due to the complexity of the policy and practical issues at stake. Despite the longitudinal research approach, the use of institutional theory can only offer a flavour of how institutionalised values, norms and behaviours influence health IT policy and practice.Practical implicationsThe paper demonstrates the complexity of translating centralised ICT policy in healthcare to practical solutions for clinicians and other stakeholders. It shows how a large‐scale ICT programme based on procurement of technology is unlikely to succeed where important issues of user engagement and a sound “business case” have not been achieved.Originality/valueThis research contributes to the theoretical literature on institutionalism by addressing the dichotomy between institutional and technical environments. While technology is often discussed in isolation of an institutional process, it may become embedded in organisational practices, reaching a process of sedimentation (institutionalisation) or fail to take hold and fade from view.

Clinicians’ view of tele-glaucoma

“…These findings mirror those by Tanriverdi & Iacono [55] over a decade ago in which institutional support was considered crucial for the diffusion of tele-health. The importance of institutional support is also mentioned on other e-health services, such as electronic health records [56].…”

Successful Implementation of the Balanced Scorecard in a Telecommunications Firm: An Institutional Theory Analysis

“…If new (management accounting) systems challenge what is prevailing in the organisation, they may not be reproduced, and as a result may fail to become institutionalised and taken-for-granted (Burns & Scapens, 2000). Currie and Finnegan (2011) have used Tolbert and Zucker (1996) model in the introduction of a large-scale IT-enabled change in the context of a highly institutionalised environment. They note that habitualised behaviours conspired to resist the adoption of new working practices as it conflicts with existing culturalcognitive views.…”

A New Approach to Interoperable Information Standards for Health and Social Care: Normalizing Culture, Contracts and Co-design

“…There is still work to do to influence the culture of national agencies to integrate fully with the PRSB approach. Historically, especially in England, there has been a highly top-down style of managing information systems and standards [27], which is at odds with the essentially collective ethos of PRSB. A related example is the PRSB wish to base conformance validation on a 'comply or explain' basis, not simply mechanical compliance as currently practiced.…”