Resistance to Computerized Care Planning Systems by Qualified Nurses Working in the UK NHS

Summary

Objective: This study investigated whether computerized systems, designed to produce detailed plans for the nursing care of inpatients, were resisted by the nurses who were expected to use them.

Methods: Qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews with nurses working in the UK National Health Service.

Results and Conclusions: Resistance took the form of ‘resistive compliance,’ and this resistance is analyzed and explained. Resistance can best be understood in terms of the culture of nursing. This implies that the design and implementation of computerized systems in health care should take these factors into account.

Keywords

Resistance - nursing informatics - nurses

• References

• 1 Feeney P. Preparing staff for information technology. In: Hovenga E, Kidd M, Cesnik B. editors. Health Informatics, an overview. Melbourne: Churchill Livingstone; 1996
• 2 Bijker W, Hughes T, Pinch T. editors. The social construction of technological systems, new directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press; 1987
• 3 Bloomfield B, Coombs R, Owen J, Taylor P. Doctors as managers, constructing systems and users in the National Health Service. In: Bloomfield B, Coombs R, Knights D, Littler D. editors. Information technology and organizations, strategies, networks and integration. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997
• 4 East L, Robinson J. Change in process: bringing about change in health care through action research. Journal of Clinical Nursing 1994; 3: 57-61.
• 5 Knights D, Vurdubakis T. Foucault, power, resistance and all that. In: Jermier J, Knights D, Nord W. editors. Resistance and Power in Organisations London: Routledge; 1994
• 6 Knights D, McCabe D. Ain’t misbehavin’ ? Opportunities for resistance under new forms of quality management. Sociology 2000; 34: 421-36.
• 7 De La Cuesta C. The nursing process, from development to implementation. J Adv Nurs 1983; 8: 365-71.
• 8 Pearson A, Vaughan B. Nursing models for practice. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann; 1986
• 9 Hislop S, Inglis B, Cope P, Stoddart B, McIntosh C. Situating theory in practice, student views of theory-practice in Project 2000 nursing programmes. J Adv Nurs 1996; 23: 171-7.
• 10 McCaugherty D. The theory-practice gap in nurse education, its causes and possible solutions. J Adv Nurse 1991; 16: 728-35.
• 11 Porter S, Ryan S. Breaking the boundaries between nursing and sociology, critical realist ethnography of the theory practice gap. J Adv Nurs 1996; 24: 413-20.
• 12 Porter S. Northern nursing, the limits of idealism. Irish Journal of Sociology 1995; 5: 22-42.
• 13 Mason C. Guide to practice or ‘load of rubbish’? The influence of care plans on nursing practice in five clinical areas in Northern Ireland. J Adv Nurs 1999; 29: 380-7.
• 14 Latour B. Technology is society made durable. In: Law J. editor. A Sociology of monsters, essays on power, technology and domination. London: Routledge; 1991
• 15 Roper N, Logan W, Tierney A. The elements of nursing. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1980
• 16 Goffman E. The presentation of self in everyday life. London: Allen Lane; 1969
• 17 Melia K. Student nurses’ construction of occupational socialisation. Sociology of Health and Illness 1984; 6: 132-15.
• 18 Melia K. Learning and working. London: Tavi-stock; 1987
• 19 Woolgar S. Technologies as cultural artefacts. In: Dutton W, Peltu M. editors. Information and communication technologies, visions and realities. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996
• 20 Foucault M. Discipline and punish. Harmonds-worth: Penguin; 1991
• 21 James N. Emotional labor, skill and work in the regulation of feelings. The Sociological Review 1989; 37: 18-33.
• 22 O’Brien M. The managed heart revisited, health and social control. The Sociological Review 1994; 42: 393-413.
• 23 Smith P. The emotional labour of nursing; Its impact on interpersonal relations, management and the educational environment in nursing. London: Macmillan; 1992
• 24 Hochschild A. The managed Heart, commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley (CA): University of California Press; 1983
• 25 Tanner J, Timmons S. Backstage in the theatre. J Adv Nurs 2000; 32: 975-80.
• 26 Davies C. Gender and the professional predicament in nursing. Buckingham: Open University Press; 1995
• 27 Grint K, Woolgar S. On some failures of nerve in constructivist and feminist perspectives on new technology. Science Technology and Human Values 1995; 20: 286-310.
• 28 Henwood F. Establishing gender perspectives on information technology, problems, issues and opportunities. In: Green H, Owen J, Pain D. editors. Gendered by design, information technology and office systems. London: Taylor and Francis; 1993
• 29 Wagner I. Womens’ voice: the case of nursing informatics. AI & Society 1993; 7: 295-310.
• 30 Schneider K, Wagner I. Constructing the ‘dossier representatif’, computer based information sharing in French hospitals. Comput Supp Coop Work 1993; 2: 229-53.
• 31 Markussen R. Constructing easiness, historical perspectives on work, computerization and women. The Sociological Review Monograph 1995; 158-80.
• 32 Latimer J. The nursing process re-examined, enrolment and translation. J Adv Nurs 1995; 22: 213-20.