IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v181y2017icp102-111.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accomplishing professional jurisdiction in intensive care: An ethnographic study of three units

Author

Listed:
  • Xyrichis, Andreas
  • Lowton, Karen
  • Rafferty, Anne Marie

Abstract

This paper reports an ethnographic study examining health professional jurisdictions within three intensive care units (ICUs) in order to draw out the social processes through which ICU clinicians organised and delivered life-saving care to critically ill patients. Data collection consisted of 240 h observation of actual practice and 27 interviews with health professionals. The research was conducted against a backdrop of international political and public pressure for national healthcare systems to deliver safe, quality and efficient healthcare. As in many Western health systems, for the English Department of Health the key to containing these challenges was a reconfiguration of responsibilities for clinicians in order to break down professional boundaries and encourage greater interprofessional working under the guise of workforce modernisation. In this paper, through the analysis of health professional interaction, we examine the properties and conditions under which professional jurisdiction was negotiated and accomplished in day-to-day ICU practice. We discuss how staff seniority influenced the nature of professional interaction and how jurisdictional boundaries were reproduced and reconfigured under conditions of routine and urgent work. Consequently, we question theorisation that treats individual professions as homogenous groups and overlooks fluctuation in the flow and intensity of work; and conclude that in ICU, urgency and seniority have a part to play in shaping jurisdictional boundaries at the level of day-to-day practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Xyrichis, Andreas & Lowton, Karen & Rafferty, Anne Marie, 2017. "Accomplishing professional jurisdiction in intensive care: An ethnographic study of three units," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 102-111.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:181:y:2017:i:c:p:102-111
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.047
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953617302009
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.047?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kroezen, M. & Mistiaen, P. & van Dijk, L. & Groenewegen, P.P. & Francke, A.L., 2014. "Negotiating jurisdiction in the workplace: A multiple-case study of nurse prescribing in hospital settings," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 107-115.
    2. Martin, Graham P. & Currie, Graeme & Finn, Rachael, 2009. "Reconfiguring or reproducing intra-professional boundaries? Specialist expertise, generalist knowledge and the 'modernization' of the medical workforce," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1191-1198, April.
    3. Lewin, Simon & Reeves, Scott, 2011. "Enacting 'team' and 'teamwork': Using Goffman's theory of impression management to illuminate interprofessional practice on hospital wards," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(10), pages 1595-1602, May.
    4. Finn, Rachael & Learmonth, Mark & Reedy, Patrick, 2010. "Some unintended effects of teamwork in healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 70(8), pages 1148-1154, April.
    5. Powell, Alison E. & Davies, Huw T.O., 2012. "The struggle to improve patient care in the face of professional boundaries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(5), pages 807-814.
    6. Nugus, Peter & Greenfield, David & Travaglia, Joanne & Westbrook, Johanna & Braithwaite, Jeffrey, 2010. "How and where clinicians exercise power: Interprofessional relations in health care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(5), pages 898-909, September.
    7. Vincent, Charles, 2009. "Social scientists and patient safety: Critics or contributors?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 1777-1779, December.
    8. Rodriquez, Jason, 2015. "Who is on the medical team?: Shifting the boundaries of belonging on the ICU," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 112-118.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Johannessen, Lars E.F., 2018. "Workplace assimilation and professional jurisdiction: How nurses learn to blur the nursing-medical boundary," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 201(C), pages 51-58.
    2. Shachar, Leeor, 2022. "“You become a slightly better doctor”: Doctors adopting integrated medical expertise through interactions with E-patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 305(C).
    3. Miner, Skye A., 2019. "Demarcating the dirty work: Canadian Fertility professionals’ use of boundary-work in contentious egg donation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 19-26.
    4. Skyberg, Henriette Lund & Innvaer, Simon, 2020. "Dynamics of interprofessional teamwork: Why three logics are better than one," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    5. Caronia, Letizia & Saglietti, Marzia & Chieregato, Arturo, 2020. "Challenging the interprofessional epistemic boundaries: The practices of informing in nurse-physician interaction," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Liberati, Elisa Giulia & Gorli, Mara & Scaratti, Giuseppe, 2016. "Invisible walls within multidisciplinary teams: Disciplinary boundaries and their effects on integrated care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 31-39.
    2. McDougall, A. & Goldszmidt, M. & Kinsella, E.A. & Smith, S. & Lingard, L., 2016. "Collaboration and entanglement: An actor-network theory analysis of team-based intraprofessional care for patients with advanced heart failure," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 108-117.
    3. Skyberg, Henriette Lund & Innvaer, Simon, 2020. "Dynamics of interprofessional teamwork: Why three logics are better than one," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    4. Evans, Sarah & Scarbrough, Harry, 2014. "Supporting knowledge translation through collaborative translational research initiatives: ‘Bridging’ versus ‘blurring’ boundary-spanning approaches in the UK CLAHRC initiative," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 119-127.
    5. Glimmerveen, Ludo & Ybema, Sierk & Nies, Henk, 2018. "Empowering citizens or mining resources? The contested domain of citizen engagement in professional care services," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 1-8.
    6. Caronia, Letizia & Saglietti, Marzia & Chieregato, Arturo, 2020. "Challenging the interprofessional epistemic boundaries: The practices of informing in nurse-physician interaction," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    7. Standing, Holly & Patterson, Rebecca & Dalkin, Sonia & Exley, Catherine & Brittain, Katie, 2020. "A critical exploration of professional jurisdictions and role boundaries in inter-professional end-of-life care in the community," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 266(C).
    8. Powell, Alison E. & Davies, Huw T.O., 2012. "The struggle to improve patient care in the face of professional boundaries," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(5), pages 807-814.
    9. Sumati Ahuja, 2023. "Professional Identity Threats in Interprofessional Collaborations: A Case of Architects in Professional Service Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 428-453, March.
    10. Croft, Charlotte & Currie, Graeme, 2020. "Realizing policy aspirations of voluntary sector involvement in integrated care provision: Insights from the English National Health Service," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(5), pages 549-555.
    11. Miner, Skye A., 2019. "Demarcating the dirty work: Canadian Fertility professionals’ use of boundary-work in contentious egg donation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 19-26.
    12. Tyskbo, Daniel & Sergeeva, Anastasia, 2022. "Brains exposed: How new imaging technology reconfigures expertise coordination in neurosurgery," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 292(C).
    13. Neuwelt, Pat M. & Kearns, Robin A. & Browne, Annette J., 2015. "The place of receptionists in access to primary care: Challenges in the space between community and consultation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 287-295.
    14. Malcolm, Dominic & Scott, Andrea, 2011. "Professional relations in sport healthcare: Workplace responses to organisational change," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(4), pages 513-520, February.
    15. Reiss, Michael & Greene, Carolyn A. & Ford, Julian D., 2017. "Is it time to talk? Understanding specialty child mental healthcare providers' decisions to engage in interdisciplinary communication with pediatricians," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 66-71.
    16. Normand Carpentier, 2013. "Entry Into a Care Trajectory," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(2), pages 21582440134, June.
    17. Helen Anderson & Yvonne Birks & Joy Adamson, 2020. "Exploring the relationship between nursing identity and advanced nursing practice: An ethnographic study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(7-8), pages 1195-1208, April.
    18. Martin, Graham P. & Learmonth, Mark, 2012. "A critical account of the rise and spread of ‘leadership’: The case of UK healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 281-288.
    19. Nicolini, Davide & Waring, Justin & Mengis, Jeanne, 2011. "Policy and practice in the use of root cause analysis to investigate clinical adverse events: Mind the gap," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 217-225, July.
    20. Idun Røseth & Halvor Austenå & Eva Sommerseth & Bente Dahl & Anne Lyberg & Rob Bongaardt, 2020. "Fluid Boundaries and Moving Targets: Midwife Leaders’ Perspectives on Continuing Professional Education," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:181:y:2017:i:c:p:102-111. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.