A relational paradigm for the patient-doctor figuration, between engagement and shared doctoring

Journal title SALUTE E SOCIETÀ
Author/s Alberto Ardissone
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/1 Language English
Pages 17 P. 63-79 File size 201 KB
DOI 10.3280/SES2022-001005
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This paper aims to analyse the patient-doctor relationship as a form of citizen participation at a micro-level. The work presents the main findings of a study conducted in Italy in the field of type 1 diabetes in 2018, which recruited 47 patients and 20 doctors. Findings show that the patient-doctor relationship is properly explained with a relational perspective, as interdepend-ent figurations of transactors characterised by dynamic processes of power balances. This ap-proach helps to explain patients’ participation by proposing the use of the relational concept of shared doctoring to buttress that of engagement. Indeed, the latter, despite its popularity, still seems to be erratic and blurred. In the end, the concept of engagement underpinned by shared doctoring could be useful for analysing patients’ participation in the healthcare system at a mi-cro-level by inverting healthcare’s underlying foundations towards a logic of care, in place of the current leading logic of choice.

Keywords: patient-doctor figurations; interdependency; therapeutic-device; self-management; shared doctoring; engagement.

  1. Barello S., Triberti S., Graffigna G., Libreri C., et al. (2016). eHealth for Patient Engagement: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2013.
  2. Bos L., Carroll D., Marsh A. (2008). The impatient patient. Studies in health technology and informatics, 137: 1–13. PMID: 18560062
  3. Cappon G., Acciaroli G., Vettoretti M., Facchinetti A., Sparacino G. (2017). Wearable Continuous Glucose Monitoring Sensors: A Revolution in Diabetes Treatment. Electronics, 6: 65.
  4. Carman K.L., Dardess P., Maurer M. et al. (2013). Patient And Family Engagement: A Framework For Understanding The Elements And Developing Interventions And Policies. Health Affairs, 32(2): 223-231.
  5. Clancy C.M. (2011). Editorial. Patient Engagement in Health Care. Health Services Research, 46(2): 389-393.
  6. Cohen N., Arieli T. (2011). Field research in conflict environments: Methodological challenges and snowball sampling. Journal of Peace Research, 48(4): 423–435. DOI: 10.1177/002234331140569
  7. Corbetta P. (2015). La ricerca sociale: metodologia e tecniche. III Le tecniche qualitative. Seconda edizione. Bologna: Il Mulino.
  8. Dunning E., Hughes J. (2013). Norbert Elias and modern sociology. London: Bloomsbury.
  9. Edwards R., Holland J., a cura di (2013). What is qualitative interviewing? Londra: Bloomsbury.
  10. Elias N. (1978). What is sociology?. New York: Columbia University Press.
  11. Elias N. (2008). Power and Civilisation. Journal of power, 1(2): 135-142. DOI: 10.1080/1754029080230954
  12. Emirbayer M. (1997). Manifesto for a relational sociology. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2): 281–317. DOI: 10.1086/23120
  13. Fraser S., Fomiattia R., Moorea D., et al. (2020). Is another relationship possible? Connoisseurship and the doctor-patient relationship for men who consume performance and image-enhancing drugs. Social Science & Medicine, 246: 112720.
  14. Funnell M.M., Anderson R.M., Arnold M.S. et al. (1991). Empowerment: An Idea Whose Time Has Come in Diabetes Education. The Diabetes Educator, 17(1): 37-41. DOI: 10.1177/01457217910170010
  15. Galindo R.J., Aleppo G. (2020). Continuous glucose monitoring: The achievement of 100 years of innovation in diabetes technology. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, 170: 108502.
  16. Gallivan J., Burns K.K., Bellows M., Eigenseher C. (2012). The Many Faces of Patient Engagement. Journal of Participatory Medicine, 4: e32.
  17. Granados-Santiago M., Valenza M.C., López-López L. et al. (2020). Shared decision-making and patient engagement program during acute exacerbation of COPD hospitalization: A randomized control trial. Patient Education and Counseling, 103: 702-78.
  18. Grossman Liu L., Ancker J.S., Masterson Creber R.M. (2021). Improving Patient Engagement Through Patient Decision Support. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 60(3): 438-441.
  19. Gruman J., Holmes Rovner M., French M.E. et al. (2010). From patient education to patient engagement: Implications for the field of patient education. Patient Education and Counseling, 78: 350-356.
  20. Harrington R.L., Hanna M.L., Oehrlein E.M. (2020). Defining Patient Engagement in Research: Results of a Systematic Review and Analysis: Report of the ISPOR Patient-Centered Special Interest Group. Value Health, 23(6): 677-688.
  21. Horwitz D.L., Klonoff D.C. (2017). New Technologies for Glucose Monitoring and Insulin Administration. In: Holt R.I.G., Cockram C.S., Flyvbjerg A., Goldstein B.J., editors, Textbook of diabetes. Fifth Edition. Chichester, West Sussex, UK; Hoboken, NJ.: Wiley-Blackwell.
  22. Hsieh H.F., Shannon S.E. (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9): 1277-1288. DOI: 10.1177/104973230527668
  23. King N. (2004). Using interviews in qualitative research. In: Cassell C., Symon G., editors, Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research. London: Sage.
  24. Lupton D. (2014). Beyond Techno-Utopia: Critical Approaches to Digital Health Technologies. Societies, 4: 706-711.
  25. Mol A. (2008). The logic of care. Health and the problem of patient choice. London: Routledge.
  26. Montenegro R.E., Dori-Hacohen G. (2020). Morality in sugar talk: Presenting blood glucose levels in routine diabetes medical visits. Social Science & Medicine, 253, 112925.
  27. Murdoch J., Salter C., Ford J., et al. (2020). The “unknown territory” of goal-setting: Negotiating a novel interactional activity within primary care doctor-patient consultations for patients with multiple chronic conditions. Social Science & Medicine, 256, 113040.
  28. Nettleton S. (2013). The sociology of health and illness. 3rd edition. Cambridge: Polity Press
  29. Parsons T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe, IL: Free press.
  30. Pilnick A., Dingwall R. (2011). On the remarkable persistence of asymmetry in doctor/patient interaction: A critical review. Social Science & Medicine, 72, 1374–1382.
  31. Piras E.M., Miele F. (2017). Clinical self-tracking and monitoring technologies: negotiations in the ICT-mediated patient–provider relationship. Health Sociology Review, 26, 1, 38-53. DOI: 10.1080/14461242.2016.121231
  32. Pols J. (2012). Care at a distance: on the closeness of technology. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
  33. Powell C., Dépelteau F., a cura di (2013). Conceptualizing Relational Sociology. Ontological and theoretical issues. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
  34. Price M.J. (1993). An experiential model of learning diabetes self-management. Qualitative Health Research, 3, 1, 29–54. DOI: 10.1177/10497323930030010
  35. Storni C. (2015). Patients’ lay expertise in chronic self-care: a case study in type 1 diabetes. Health Expectation, 18, 1439–1450.
  36. Taleb N., Quintal A., Rakheja R. et al., (2021). Perceptions and expectations of adults with type 1 diabetes for the use of artificial pancreas systems with and without glucagon addition: Results of an online survey. Nutrition, Metabolism & Cardiovascular Diseases, 31: 658-665.
  37. Thorne S., Paterson B., Russell C. (2003). The Structure of Everyday Self-Care Decision Making in Chronic Illness. Qualitative Health Research, 13(10): 1337–1352. DOI: 10.1177/104973230325803
  38. Topol E. (2015). The patient will see you now. New York: Basic Books.
  39. Van Krieken R. (2001). Norbert Elias and Process Sociology. In: Ritzer G., Smart B., editors, Handbook of Social Theory. Londra: Sage.
  40. Van Olmen J., Ku G.M., Bermejo R. et al. (2011). The growing caseload of chronic life-long conditions calls for a move towards full self-management in low-income countries. Globalization and Health, 7: 38. DOI: 10.1186/1744-8603-7-3
  41. Vest B.M., Kahn L.S., Danzo A. et al. (2013). Diabetes self-management in a low-income population: impacts of social support and relationships with the health care system. Chronic Illness, 9(2): 145–155. DOI: 10.1177/174239531347567
  42. Woehrle H., Arzt M., Graml A. et al. (2018). Effect of a patient engagement tool on positive airway pressure adherence: analysis of a German healthcare provider database. Sleep Medicine, 41: 20-26.
  43. Yegian J.M., Dardess P., Shannon M., Carman K.L. (2013). Engaged Patients Will Need Comparative Physician-Level Quality Data And Information About Their Out-Of-Pocket Costs. Health Affairs, 32(2): 328-337.
  44. ADA – American Diabetes Association (2019). Standards of medical care in diabetes. Diabetes Care, 42, 1, 1–193.
  45. AMD-SID (2018). Standard italiani per la cura del diabete mellito. -- Testo disponibile al sito: http://www.siditalia.it/pdf/Standard%20di%20Cura%20AMD%20-%20SID%202018_protetto2.pdf (11/03/2021).
  46. Ardissone A. (2021). From loyalty to resignation: Patient–doctor figurations in type 1 diabetes. Sociology of Health & Illness, 43(6): 1388-1404. DOI: 10.1111/1467-9566.1330
  47. Asagbra O.E., Burke D., Liang H. (2019). The association between patient engagement HIT functionalities and quality of care: Does more mean better?. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 130: 103893.
  48. Barello S., Graffigna G., Vegni E. (2012). Patient Engagement as an Emerging Challenge for Healthcare Services: Mapping the Literature. Nursing Research and Practice, 2012: 905934. DOI: 10.1155/2012/90593

Alberto Ardissone, A relational paradigm for the patient-doctor figuration, between engagement and shared doctoring in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" 1/2022, pp 63-79, DOI: 10.3280/SES2022-001005