Policy-makers' conception of patient non-attendance fees in specialist healthcare: a qualitative document analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Patients missing their scheduled appointments in specialist healthcare without giving notice can undermine efficient care delivery. To reduce patient non-attendance and possibly compensate healthcare providers, policy-makers have noted the viability of implementing patient non-attendance fees. However, these fees may be controversial and generate public resistance. Identifying the concepts attributed to non-attendance fees is important to better understand the controversies surrounding the introduction and use of these fees. Patient non-attendance fees in specialist healthcare have been extensively debated in Norway and Denmark, two countries that are fairly similar regarding political culture, population size and healthcare system. However, although Norway has implemented a patient non-attendance fee scheme, Denmark has not. This study aimed to identify and compare how policy-makers in Norway and Denmark have conceptualised patient non-attendance fees over three decades. DESIGN: A qualitative document study with a multiple-case design. METHODS: A theory-driven qualitative analysis of policy documents (n=55) was performed. RESULTS: Although patient non-attendance fees were seen as a measure to reduce non-attendance rates in both countries, the specific conceptualisation of the fees differed. The fees were understood as a monetary disincentive in Norwegian policy documents. In the Danish documents, the fees were framed as an educative measure to foster a sense of social responsibility, as well as serving as a monetary disincentive. The data suggest, however, a recent change in the Danish debate emphasising fees as a disincentive. In both countries, fees were partly justified as a means of compensating providers for the loss of income. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate how, as a regulative policy tool, patient non-attendance fees have been conceptualised and framed differently, even in apparently similar contexts. This suggests that a more nuanced and complex understanding of why such fees are debated is needed.

Don't stand so close to me: Perceptions of others' compliance with COVID-19 recommendations and support for strict policy measures in Norway.

Many democratically elected governments in states that are otherwise considered liberal have imposed strict policy measures, including policies allowing for coercion and/or punishment of transgressors to prevent the transmission of the new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2). Previous studies have indicated that trust in government institutions engenders a positive public response during a crisis and that the implementation of strict policy measures in a crisis-measures otherwise considered authoritarian-can increase trust in government institutions, even in liberal democratic states. However, few studies have focused on the relationship between perceived compliance with government-issued recommendations and individual preferences with regard to authoritarian governmental crisis management. The objective of this study was to estimate the association between perceived compliance with government recommendations among citizens and support for strict policy measures in a pandemic setting. We draw on unique data from a cross-sectional survey conducted in the wake of the first COVID-19 wave in Norway (n = 935). Logistic regression analyses indicate a strong negative association between support for strict policy measures and the belief that others are following the government-issued recommendations. Our results suggest that participants would consider strict policy measures less essential if they believed that other citizens were complying with the rules.

The role of the district medical officer after the pandemic - a qualitative study. / Rollen som kommuneoverlege etter pandemien ­ en kvalitativ studie.

BACKGROUND: While district medical officers' role was described as unclear and lacking visibility before the COVID-19 pandemic, their community medicine expertise became highly significant in the management of the pandemic. We wished to investigate district medical officers' perceptions of their role after the pandemic was over. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The study was designed as a theory-driven qualitative interview study. Twelve district medical officers in the Norwegian county of Innlandet were interviewed in the autumn of 2022. The data were subjected to thematic analysis. RESULTS: The study identified a number of factors associated with the capabilities, motivation, and structural and organisational framework of district medical officers that were assumed to impact on the execution of their role and participation in decision-making processes in the local authorities. The district medical officers found that their role had become clearer and more visible during the pandemic, but they had low expectations of being more involved and having a stronger voice in the development of future health services in the municipalities. One proposed measure is to devise a guide for the district medical officer function, such that the local authorities are given clear guidelines on the district medical officers' areas of responsibility and the issues in which they should be involved. INTERPRETATION: The district medical officers felt that 'the pandemic effect is over', and that they had to fight their way back into important decision-making arenas. Measures at individual and organisational level can help ensure the optimal use of district medical officers' community medicine expertise in the municipalities.

Mapping out the arguments for and against patient non-attendance fees in healthcare: an analysis of public consultation documents.

BACKGROUND: Patients not attending their appointments without giving notice burden healthcare services. To reduce non-attendance rates, patient non-attendance fees have been introduced in various settings. Although some argue in narrow economic terms that behavioural change as a result of financial incentives is a voluntary transaction, charging patients for non-attendance remains controversial. This paper aims to investigate the controversies of implementing patient non-attendance fees. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to map out the arguments in the Norwegian public debate concerning the introduction and use of patient non-attendance fees at public outpatient clinics. METHODS: Public consultation documents (2009-2021) were thematically analysed (n=84). We used a preconceived conceptual framework based on the works of Grant to guide the analysis. RESULTS: A broad range of arguments for and against patient non-attendance fees were identified, here referring to the acceptability of the fees' purpose, the voluntariness of the responses, the effects on the individual character and institutional norms and the perceived fairness and comparative effectiveness of patient non-attendance fees. Whereas the aim of motivating patients to keep their appointments to avoid poor utilisation of resources and increased waiting times was widely supported, principled and practical arguments against patient non-attendance fees were raised. CONCLUSION: A narrow economic understanding of incentives cannot capture the breadth of arguments for and against patient non-attendance fees. Policy makers may draw on this insight when implementing similar incentive schemes. The study may also contribute to the general debate on ethics and incentives.

Local public health projectification in practice: a qualitative study of facilitators and barriers to a public health plan implementation.

AIMS: To identify factors perceived by local government employees to affect the implementation of a municipal public health plan. METHODS: Qualitative individual interviews (n=13) were carried out. Participants were sampled from three districts in Oslo municipality, Norway, and asked about their experiences with an ongoing implementation of the Oslo Public Health Plan (2017-2020). The conceptual framework of public sector projectification - a growing reliance on project organisation of policies - informed the study. The consolidated framework for implementation research was used to aid data coding and subsequent thematic analysis. RESULTS: Implementation facilitators included factors perceived to support flexibility, including plan adaptability to the local setting, and factors perceived to enable structure and control during the implementation process, such as the articulation of specific goals and a shared understanding of public health work. Barriers were mainly related to complex aspects of the plan, such as the need to involve multiple stakeholders and levels of governance, and to tensions between the time-limited implementation process and the permanent organisational structures. CONCLUSIONS: This study has demonstrated how research-based methods can be used for the evaluation of a local community implementation process. It has identified implementation determinants using a predetermined taxonomy of operationally defined factors that are likely to influence implementation. However, while implementing a time-limited public health plan can be seen as 'taking action' in relation to multidimensional and complex problems, further research is needed to investigate whether plan implementation has a long-term impact on the surrounding organisation and, eventually, on public health outcomes.

On the person in personal health responsibility.

In this paper, we start by comparing the two agents, Ann and Bob, who are involved in two car crashes. Whereas Ann crashes her car through no fault of her own, Bob crashes as a result of reckless driving. Unlike Ann, Bob is held criminally responsible, and the insurance company refuses to cover the car's damages. Nonetheless, Ann and Bob both receive emergency hospital treatment that a third party covers, regardless of any assessment of personal responsibility. What warrants such apparent exceptionalism with respect to personal responsibility in the healthcare context? We turn our attention to an understudied aspect of the debate on personal health responsibility, namely, the conceptualisation of the person in need of emergency hospital treatment. Drawing on the research of Joshua Knobe and Shaun Nichols, we propose that a context-dependent conceptualisation of the person may help explain a reluctance to ascribe responsibility to the individual for negative health outcomes.

Models of integrated care for older people with frailty: a horizon scanning review.

OBJECTIVES: Frailty, a multifaceted geriatric condition, is an emerging global health problem. Integrated care models designed to meet the complex needs of the older people with frailty are required. Early identification of innovative models may inform policymakers and other stakeholders of service delivery alternatives they can introduce and locally adapt so as to tackle system fragmentation and lack of coordination. This study used horizon scanning methodologies to systematically search for, prioritise and assess new integrated care models for older people with frailty and investigated experts' views on barriers and facilitators to the adoption of horizon scanning in health services research. METHODS: A four-step horizon scanning review was performed. Frailty-specific integrated care models and interventions were identified through a review of published literature supplemented with grey literature searches. Results were filtered and prioritised according to preset criteria. An expert panel focus group session assessed the prioritised models and interventions on innovativeness, impact and potential for implementation. The experts further evaluated horizon scanning for its perceived fruitfulness in aiding decision-making. RESULTS: Nine integrated care models and interventions at system level (n=5) and community level (n=4) were summarised and assessed by the expert panel (n=7). Test scores were highest for the Walcheren integrated care model (system-based model) and EuFrailSafe (community-based intervention). The participants stated that horizon scanning as a decision-making tool could aid in assessing knowledge gaps, criticising the status quo and developing new insights. Barriers to adoption of horizon scanning on individual, organisational and wider institutional level were also identified. CONCLUSION: Study findings demonstrated that horizon scanning is a potentially valuable tool in the search for innovative service delivery models. Further studies should evaluate how horizon scanning can be institutionalised and effectively used for serving this purpose.

Stakeholder views of the development of a clinical quality registry for interventional radiology: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical quality registries (CQRs) can likely improve quality in healthcare and research. However, studies indicate that effective use of CQRs is hindered by lack of engagement and interest among stakeholders, as well as factors related to organisational context, registry design and data quality. To fulfil the potential of CQRs, more knowledge on stakeholders' perceptions of the factors that will facilitate or hamper the development of CQRs is essential to the more appropriate targeting of registry implementation and the subsequent use of the data. The primary aim of this study was to examine factors that can potentially affect the development of a national CQR for interventional radiology in Norway from the perspective of stakeholders. Furthermore, we wanted to identify the intervention functions likely to enable CQR development. Only one such registry, located in Sweden, has been established. To provide a broader context for the Norwegian study, we also sought to investigate experiences with the development of this registry. METHODS: A qualitative study of ten Norwegian radiologists and radiographers using focus groups was conducted, and an in-depth interview with the initiator of the Swedish registry was carried out. Questions were based on the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation for Behaviour Model and the Theoretical Domains Framework. The participants' responses were categorised into predefined themes using a deductive process of thematic analysis. RESULTS: Knowledge of the rationale used in establishing a CQR, beliefs about the beneficial consequences of a registry for quality improvement and research and an opportunity to learn from a well-developed registry were perceived by the participants as factors facilitating CQR development. The study further identified a range of development barriers related to environmental and resource factors (e.g., a lack of organisational support, time) and individuallevel factors (e.g., role boundaries, resistance to change), as well as several intervention functions likely to be appropriate in targeting these barriers. CONCLUSION: This study provides a deeper understanding of factors that may be involved in the behaviour of stakeholders regarding the development of a CQR. The findings may assist in designing, implementing and evaluating a methodologically rigorous CQR intervention.

Priority setting and personal health responsibility: an analysis of Norwegian key policy documents.

BACKGROUND: The idea that individuals are responsible for their health has been the focus of debate in the theoretical literature and in its concrete application to healthcare policy in many countries. Controversies persist regarding the form, substance and fairness of allocating health responsibility to the individual, particularly in universal, need-based healthcare systems. OBJECTIVE: To examine how personal health responsibility has been framed and rationalised in Norwegian key policy documents on priority setting. METHODS: Documents issued or published by the Ministry of Health and Care Services between 1987 and 2018 were thematically analysed (n=14). We developed a predefined conceptual framework that guided the analysis. The framework included: (1) the subject and object of responsibility, (2) the level of conceptual abstraction, (3) temporality, (4) normative justificatory arguments and (5) objections to the application of personal health responsibility. RESULTS: As an additional criterion, personal health responsibility has been interpreted as relevant if: (A) the patient's harmful behaviour is repeated after receiving treatment (retrospectively), and if (B) the success of the treatment is conditional on the patient's behavioural change (prospectively). When discussed as a retrospective criterion, considerations of reciprocal fairness have been dominant. When discussed as a prospective criterion, the expected benefit of treatment justified its relevance. CONCLUSION: Personal health responsibility appears to challenge core values of equality, inclusion and solidarity in the Norwegian context and has been repeatedly rejected as a necessary criterion for priority setting. However, the responsibility criterion seems to have some relevance in particular priority setting decisions.

Avoiding hypersensitive reluctance to address parental responsibility in childhood obesity.

Childhood obesity is an increasing health problem. Prior empirical research suggests that, although discussing lifestyle behaviours with parents could help prevent childhood obesity and its health-related consequences, physicians are reluctant to address parental responsibility in the clinical setting. Therefore, this paper questions whether parents might be (or might be held) responsible for their children's obesity, and if so, whether parental responsibility ought to be addressed in the physician-patient/parent encounter. We illustrate how different ideal-typical models of the physician-patient/parent interaction emphasise different understandings of patient autonomy and parental responsibility and argue that these models advocate different responses to an appeal for discussing parents' role in childhood obesity. We suggest that responsibility should be attributed to parents because of their parental roles in providing for their children's welfare. We also argue that whether, and how, this responsibility gives rise to a requirement to act depends on the parents' capacities. A deliberative-oriented physician-patient/parent interaction best captures the current ideals of antipaternalism, patient autonomy, and shared and evidence-informed decision-making, and might facilitate parental role development. We conclude that, while not discussing parental responsibility for childhood obesity in the clinical setting can be warranted in particular cases, this cannot be justified as a general rule.

Factors influencing the use of video interpretation compared to in-person interpretation in hospitals: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Facilitating access to professional interpretation services is key to equitable hospital care for migrants with limited language proficiency; however, interpreter underuse has been documented. The factors that potentially enable or hinder professional interpreter use are not well understood. We aimed to compare perceptions held by hospital managers and healthcare practitioners of the factors influencing the use of remote video interpretation and in-person interpretation. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective qualitative design. Two hospitals, located in Austria and Norway, with adequately similar baseline characteristics were purposively selected. Both hospitals used in-person interpreters, and the Austrian hospital had recently introduced remote video interpretation as an alternative and supplement. Fifteen managers and healthcare practitioners participated in focus groups and individual interviews. Data were thematically analysed with the aid of behavioural system theory. RESULTS: Across sites, the facilitators of interpreter use included individual factors (knowledge about interpreter services, skills to assess when/how to use an interpreter, beliefs about favourable consequences), as well as organisational factors (soft budget constraints). Barriers were identified at the individual level (lack of interpersonal skills to handle difficult provider-interpreter situations, lack of skills to persuade patients to accept interpreter use, lack of trust in service professionalism), and at the organisational level (limited interpreter availability, time constraints). The introduction of remote video interpretation services seemed to counteract the organisational barriers. Video interpretation was further perceived to enable patient confidentiality, which was regarded as a facilitator. However, video interpretation introduced specific barriers, including perceived communication deficiencies. CONCLUSION: This study has identified a range of factors that are perceived to influence the use of interpreters in hospitals. The research suggests that-implementing remote video interpretation services lessens the barriers to use and that such services should be introduced in hospital settings as an alternative or supplement to in-person interpreters. Further intervention functions should be considered to bring about change in the use of interpretation services, including developing guidelines for interpreter use, educating staff in the appropriate use of video technology, and training staff in communicating with interpreter and patients with limited language proficiency.

'There is no such thing as getting sick justly or unjustly' - a qualitative study of clinicians' beliefs on the relevance of personal responsibility as a basis for health prioritisation.

BACKGROUND: Concerns have been raised regarding the reasonableness of using personal health responsibility as a principle or criterion for setting priorities in healthcare. While this debate continues, little is known about clinicians' views on the role of patient responsibility in clinical contexts. This paper contributes to the knowledge on the empirical relevance of personal responsibility for priority setting at the clinical level. METHODS: A qualitative study of Norwegian clinicians (n = 15) was designed, using semi-structured interviews with vignettes to elicit beliefs on the relevance of personal responsibility as a basis for health prioritisation. Sampling was undertaken purposefully. The interviews were conducted in three hospital trusts in South-Eastern Norway between May 2018 and February 2019 and were analysed with conceptually driven thematic analysis. RESULTS: The findings suggest that clinicians endorsed a general principle of personal health responsibility but were reluctant to introduce personal health responsibility as a formal priority setting criterion. Five main objections were cited, relating to avoidability, causality, harshness, intrusiveness, and inequity. Still, both retrospective and prospective attributions of personal responsibility were perceived as relevant in specific clinical settings. The most prominent argument in favour of personal health responsibility was grounded in the idea that holding patients responsible for their conduct would contribute to the efficient use of healthcare resources. Other arguments included fairness to others, desert and autonomy, but such standpoints were controversial and held only marginal relevance. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides important novel insights into the clinicians' beliefs about personal health responsibility improving the empirical knowledge concerning its fairness and potential applications to healthcare prioritisation. These findings suggest that although personal health responsibility would be difficult to implement as a steering criterion within the main priority setting framework, there might be clinical contexts where it could figure in prioritisation practices. Additional research on personal health responsibility would benefit from considering the multiple clinical encounters that shape doctor-patient relationships and that create the information basis for eligibility and prioritisation for treatment.

Facilitators and barriers to clinicians' use of COPD action plans in self-management support: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Written action plans for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) aim at early recognition of exacerbations and self-initiation of interventions. Previous research suggest underuse of COPD action plans. We wanted to 1) examine which factors clinicians in specialist healthcare perceived as influencing clinicians' use of written action plans in COPD-self management support and 2) propose a framework for understanding the factors affecting clinicians' use of action plans in routine practice. METHODS: We performed a theory-driven retrospective qualitative study. Documentary data were collected to describe the COPD action plan in context. In-depth interviews with clinicians (n = 8) were carried out. Interview data were thematically analyzed, using a predetermined model for understanding behavior. RESULTS: Our study revealed that a number of factors influenced clinicians' use of action plans, including their capabilities (knowledge and skills to identify "the right patient" and to individualize the plan template) and motivations (beliefs, reinforcements, and emotions s.a. frustration, fear, and distrust), together with organizational and social opportunities (resources, patient, and GP preferences). CONCLUSION: A multilevel understanding of factors that affect clinicians' use of action plans in self-management support is needed. PRACTICE IMPLICATION: The proposed framework can be used to guide future initiatives to promote targeted self-management support.

Being Healthy, Being Sick, Being Responsible: Attitudes towards Responsibility for Health in a Public Healthcare System.

Lifestyle-induced diseases are becoming a burden on healthcare, actualizing the discussion on health responsibilities. Using data from the National Association for Heart and Lung Diseases (LHL)'s 2015 Health Survey (N = 2689), this study examined the public's attitudes towards personal and social health responsibility in a Norwegian population. The questionnaires covered self-reported health and lifestyle, attitudes towards personal responsibility and the authorities' responsibility for promoting health, resource-prioritisation and socio-demographic characteristics. Block-wise multiple linear regression assessed the association between attitudes towards health responsibilities and individual lifestyle, political orientation and health condition. We found a moderate support for social responsibility across political views. Respondents reporting unhealthier eating habits, smokers and physically inactive were less supportive of health promotion policies (including information, health incentives, prevention and regulations). The idea that individuals are responsible for taking care of their health was widely accepted as an abstract ideal. Yet, only a third of the respondents agreed with introducing higher co-payments for treatment of 'self-inflicted' conditions and levels of support were patterned by health-related behaviour and left-right political orientation. Our study suggests that a significant support for social responsibility does not exclude a strong support for personal health responsibility. However, conditional access to healthcare based on personal lifestyle is still controversial.

Factors perceived to influence implementation of task shifting in highly specialised healthcare: a theory-based qualitative approach.

BACKGROUND: New approaches to control healthcare expenditures and increase access to quality care are required by decision-makers in high-income countries. One strategy is to reallocate tasks from doctors to nurses. Evidence suggests that quality, effectiveness and efficiency of task shifting are context sensitive and affected by implementation. However, little is known about implementability of task shifting in specialised healthcare. We aimed to identify factors perceived to influence implementation of doctor-to-nurse task shifting in a hospital setting and improve understanding of task shifting implementability by using theory-based frameworks for analysing behaviour. Nurse-led bone marrow examination exemplified task shifting from the medical to the nursing domain. METHODS: Doctors and nurses (n = 17) in a haematology department at a Norwegian university hospital were asked about factors perceived to influence implementation of nurse-led bone marrow aspirations and biopsies. Methods included in-depth semi-structured interviews (n = 11) and focus-group discussion (n = 6). Data were analysed using the Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation behaviour model and the Theoretical Domains Framework. RESULTS: Ten factors perceived to influence implementation were identified. Three factors were related to capability, including (1) knowledge and acceptability of task shifting rationale; (2) dynamic role boundaries; and (3) technical skills to perform biopsies and aspirations. Five factors were related to motivation, including (4) beliefs about task shifting consequences, such as efficiency, quality and patient satisfaction; (5) beliefs about capabilities, such as technical, communicative and emotional skills; (6) job satisfaction and esteem; (7) organisational culture, such as team optimism; and (8) emotions, such as fear of informal nurse hierarchy and envy. The last two factors were related to opportunity, including (9) project planning and leadership, and voluntariness; and (10) patient preferences. CONCLUSION: Task shifting from doctors to nurses in specialised healthcare requires not only development of technical skills but also complex changes in organisation, clinical routines and role identity. Educational and organisational interventions to build a team-oriented culture could potentially increase the possibility of successful task shifting and stimulate nurses to take on untraditional responsibilities. Environmental restructuring to support doctors using their time in activities only doctors can perform may be needed to realise potential efficiency gains.

Rationing cancer treatment: a qualitative study of perceptions of legitimate limit-setting.

BACKGROUND: Governments are facing tough choices about whether to fund new, promising but highly expensive drugs within the public healthcare system. Decisions that some drugs are not sufficiently beneficial relative to their cost to merit public funding are often contentious. The importance of making decisions that stakeholders can understand and accept as legitimate is increasingly recognized and is commonly understood to be a crucial component for stakeholder support and successful implementation. Yet, little is known about clinicians' perceptions of legitimate limit-setting. This study aimed to examine oncologists' perceptions of the legitimacy of governmental decisions to deny patients access to new cancer drugs because effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the drugs has not been demonstrated. METHODS: Semi-structured in-depth interviews with 12 Norwegian oncologists were carried out. Data were interpreted with the use of theory driven thematic analysis. The analytical framework of Accountability for reasonableness aided data gathering and interpretation. RESULTS: The participants endorsed the ideal of explicit criteria-based priority setting. Yet, when confronted with actual rationing decisions, they were far more equivocal. They advocated for increased access to drugs and were not always prepared to accept rationing of drugs they felt would benefit their patient. Distrust in the Norwegian centralised drug review process was found and different rationales were identified: i) Lack of engagement with the process, ii) Disagreement with the use of rationing criteria, iii) Lack of transparency and lack of dispute resolution procedures. Concerns about the wider implications of rationing decisions were reported. Most importantly, these related to negative impact on patient-doctor relationship of micro-level rationing and to inequities in drug availability resulting from privatisation of high-cost cancer treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Drawing on the analytical framework, we conclude that perceptions of legitimacy regarding rationing of high-cost drugs include procedural fairness. However, notions of substantive justice also seem to be important for accepting reasons given for decisions. Regulatory legitimacy may further warrant a more sophisticated theoretical account of second-order beliefs about the justifiability of rationing new technologies. These findings indicate a need for a broader concept of legitimacy than is commonly used in the literature on healthcare prioritisation.

Antimicrobial stewardship: a qualitative study of the development of national guidelines for antibiotic use in hospitals.

BACKGROUND: As effective antibiotics are becoming a scarce resource, governmental regulation is needed to promote responsible use. Implementation of antibiotic stewardship and practice guidelines in health care facilities seems to be crucial to this effort. Empirical studies suggest, however, that guidelines have limited influence on health professionals' behavior and practice. Barriers and facilitators to guideline implementability are much studied, but little attention has been given to health professionals' perceptions of normative acceptability of guidelines as a condition for compliance. The aim of the present study was first, to examine if and how aspects potentially promoting acceptability and compliance among clinical target users were addressed during development of Norwegian national guidelines for antibiotic use in hospitals and second, to identify procedural characteristics of the development process that were perceived by target users to yield legitimate guidelines. METHODS: Qualitative deductive thematic analysis was used. A theoretical framework inspired by the AGREE II Instrument and the Accountability for reasonableness framework assisted data gathering and interpretation. Archival data was collected and used to detail the guideline development process. Semi-structured, in-depth interviews with eight clinicians with extensive knowledge of the guidelines were carried out. RESULTS: Guideline development was characterized by i) broad agreement about scope and purpose, ii) broad involvement of stakeholders in the development process, iii) use of systematic methods to search for and apply evidence, iv) easily identifiable and specific recommendations, v) provision of tools on how to put recommendations into practice, and vi) editorial independence. Several procedural characteristics were perceived by the interviewees as promoting guideline legitimacy; i) diverse perspectives systematically involved in the process, ii) accessibility and transparency of the rationales for decision making, iii) opportunities for appeals and reconsiderations, and iv) regulative authority. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights as to how guidelines that are intended to promote responsible use of antibiotics in hospitals can be carefully developed to facilitate perceptions of relevance, transparency, and authority by health professionals.