Studying Health Care “Quality” Qualitatively: The Dilemmas and Tensions between Different Forms of Evaluation Research within the U.K. National Health Service
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online September, 2002
Studying Health Care “Quality” Qualitatively: The Dilemmas and Tensions between Different Forms of Evaluation Research within the U.K. National Health Service
The authors tell the story of an attempt to depart from a tradition of evaluation research (ER) and to address the research-practice interface in a different way through a more hands-on, action research (AR) approach, which combines qualitative and quantitative methods. In doing so, they raise issues about the role and nature of evaluation for development and, especially, about the place of qualitative research in such evaluations; the identity of future ER; “paradigm wars” between the positivists and the phenomenologists; and the politics of conducting policy-based evaluations in health care settings and of what happens when qualitative researchers try to help an improvement process.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Barsness Z. , Shortell, S., Gillies, R., Hughes, E., O’Brien, J., Bohr, D., Izvi, C., & Krolovec, P. (1993). National survey of hospital quality improvement activities. Hospitals and Health Networks, 67(6), 52-55.
2.
Bate, P. (2000a). Changing the culture of a hospital: From hierarchy to networked community. Public Administration, 78(3), 485-512.
3.
Bate, P. (2000b). Synthesizing research and practice: Using the action research approach in health care settings. Social Policy and Administration, 34(4), 478-493.
4.
Bate, P. , Khan, R., & Pye, A. J. (2000). Culturally sensitive structuring: An action research-based approach to organisation development. Public Administration Quarterly, 23(4), 445-470.
5.
Boss, R. W. (1989). Organization development in health care. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
6.
Brewerton, P. , & Millward, L. (2001). Organisational research methods. London: Sage.
7.
Campbell, D. T. , & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
8.
Carter, N. , Klein, R., & Day, P. (1995). How organisations measure success: The use of performance indicators in government. London: Routledge.
9.
Centre for the Evaluation of Public Policy and Practice (CEPP) (1994). Total quality management in the National Health Service: Final report of an evaluation. Uxbridge, UK: CEPP/Brunel University.
10.
Chelimksy, E. (1995). Where we stand today in the practice of evaluation. Knowledge and Policy, 8, 8-19.
11.
Clarke, A. , & Dawson, R. (1999). Evaluation research. London: Sage.
12.
Cook, T. D. , & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
13.
Department of Health (2000). The NHS plan: A plan for investment; a plan for reform. London: The Stationery Office.
14.
Department of Health (2001). Draft research governance framework for health and social care. London: The Stationery Office.
15.
Doyle, M. , Claydon, T., & Buchanan, D. (2000). Mixed results, lousy process: The management experience of organisational change. British Journal of Management, 11(special issue), S59-S80.
16.
Fitzgerald, T. (1988). Can change in organisational culture really be managed?Organisation Dynamics, Autumn, 5-15.
17.
Gerowitz, M. B. (1998). Do TQM interventions change management culture? Findings and implications. Quality Management in Health Care, 6(3), 1-11.
18.
Hampshire, A. J. (2000). What is action research and can it promote change in general practice?Journal Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 6(4), 337-343.
19.
Harris, S. G. (1988). A schema-based perspective on organisational culture. Paper presented to the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Washington, DC.
20.
Hart, E. , & Bond, M. (1995). Action research for health and social care: A guide to practice. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
21.
Hills, D. (2001, May). Action Research as a component of evaluation. Presentation at National Co-ordinating Centre for Research Methods and National Co-ordinating Centre for Service Delivery and Organisation Action Research workshop, Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Birmingham, UK.
22.
Iles, V. , & Sutherland, K. (2001). Managing change in the NHS. Organisational change: A review for health care managers, professionals and researchers. London: National Co-ordinating Centre for NHS Service Delivery and Organisation R & D.
23.
Joss, R. , & Kogan, M. (1995). Advancing quality: Total quality management in the NHS. Buckingham: Open University Press.
24.
Lewin, K. (1947). Group decision and social change. In T. M. Newcombe & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 459-473). New York: Holt.
25.
Margulies, N. , & Dundon, M. W. (1987). Organisation development and health organizations. Consultation: An International Journal, 6(3), 221-235.
26.
McNulty, T. , & Ferlie, E. (1999). The Leicester Royal Infirmary reengineering programme evaluation. Warwick, UK: University of Warwick.
27.
Meyer, J. (1999). Qualitative methods in health-related action research. In C. Pope & N. Mays (Eds.), Qualitative research in health care (2nd ed.). London: BMJ.
28.
Morrison, B. (2001, May). The key tenets of action research. Presentation at National Co-ordinating Centre for Research Methods and National Co-ordinating Centre for Service Delivery and Organisation Action Research workshop, Department of Public Health and Epidemiology, University of Birmingham, UK.
29.
Morrison, B. , & Lilford, R. (2001). How can action research apply to health services?Qualitative Health Research, 11(14), 436-439.
30.
O’Connor, A. (1995). Evaluating comprehensive community initiatives: A view from history. In J. P. Connell, A. C. Kubisch, L. B. Schorr, & C. H. Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods, and contexts (pp. 23-63). Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
31.
Pawson, R. , & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
32.
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
33.
Shea, C. M. , & Howell, J. M. (1998). Organisational antecedents to the successful implementation of total quality management: A social cognitive perspective. Journal of Quality Management, 3(1), 3-24.
34.
Stickland, F. (1998). The dynamics of change. London: Routledge.
35.
Waterman, H. , Dickson, R., & de Koning, K. (2001) Action Research: A systematic review and guidance for assessment (Health Technology Assessment report 95/19/04). Southampton, UK: National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment 5(23), University of Southampton.
36.
Waterson, J. (2000). Balancing research and action: Reflections on an action research project in a social services department. Social Policy and Administration, 34(4), 494-508s.
37.
Weiss, C. (1990). Evaluation for decisions. In M. Alkin (Ed.), Debates on evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
38.
Weiss, C. (1993). Where politics and evaluation research meet. Evaluation Practice, 14(1), 93-106.
39.
Wimbush, E. , & Watson, J. (2000). An evaluation framework for health promotion: Theory, quality and effectiveness. Evaluation, 6(3), 1-21.
