Physician compliance with quality and patient safety regulations: The role of perceived enforcement approaches and commitment

Abstract

The implementation of a quality and patient safety accreditation system is crucial for hospitals. Although control systems—such as accreditation—can contribute to quality improvements, they also run the risk of unintended consequences. As a result, ways should be found to avoid or reduce these undesirable consequences. This study aims to answer this call by exploring the association of different approaches to the enforcement of rules (punishment, based on monitoring and threats of sanctions; and persuasion, based on dialog and suggestion) with compliance. To test the relation between perceived enforcement and compliance, this study used survey data collected from medical specialists (N = 92) of a large academic medical center. The findings indicate that the same system is interpreted differently and that only a perceived persuasion approach is related to higher levels of compliance. This effect is fully mediated by affective commitment. No direct or indirect effects on compliance were found for a perceived coercive approach. These results suggest that control systems can be perceived in different ways and that the implementation of a control system does therefore not automatically lead to negative and unintended outcomes.