Overcoming institutionalised barriers to digital health systems: An autoethnographic study of the judicialization of a digital health tool.
Abstract Background The deployment of digital health systems may be impeded by barriers that or are linked to underlying enduring institutions. Attempting to challenge the barriers without addressing the underpinning institution may be ineffective. This study reflects on ways actors may surmount institutionalised barriers to the uptake of digital tools in health systems. Methods Institutional theory concepts were applied to an autoethnographic case study of efforts to introduce a digital tool to provide citizens with medicines information. Results The tool’s uptake was impeded because of state regulators’ institutionalised interpretation of pharmaceutical advertising laws, which rendered the tool illegal. The regulators’ institutionalised interpretation of pharmaceutical advertising laws was successfully challenged through various actions by the author- a pharmacist, and by allies beyond the health sector. These actions included: framing the tool as legal and constitutional, litigation, and redefining these concepts: ‘advertising’, ‘health institution’, and the role of regulatory bodies vis a vis innovation. Conclusion After identifying a barrier as being institutionalised or linked to an institution, actors might challenge such barriers by engaging in institutional work; i.e. deliberate efforts to challenge the relevant institution (e.g. a law, norm or shared belief). Institutional work may require the actions of multiple actors within and beyond the health sector, including judicial actors. Such cross-sectoral alliances are efficacious because they provide institutional workers with a broader range of strategies, framings, concepts and forums with which to challenge institutionalised barriers. However, actors beyond the health system (e.g. the judiciary) must be inquisitive about the potential implications of the digital health interventions they champion.