IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v314y2022ics0277953622008000.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Online health communities and the patient-doctor relationship: An institutional logics perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Bernardi, Roberta
  • Wu, Philip F.

Abstract

Taking an institutional logics perspective, this study investigates how “internet-informed” patients manage tensions between the logic of personal choice and the logic of medical professionalism as they navigate treatment decisions and the patient-doctor relationship. Based on 44 semi-structured interviews with members of an online health community for people with diabetes, this study finds that patients exercise a great deal of agency in evaluating healthcare options not only by activating the logic of personal choice but also by appropriating the logic of medical professionalism. Furthermore, patients are strategic in deciding what community advice to share with their doctor or nurse depending on the healthcare professionals' reaction to the logic of personal choice. In contrast to many previous studies that emphasise patient consumerism fuelled by information on the Internet, this study provides a more nuanced picture of patient-doctor relationship engendered by patients’ participation in online health communities.

Suggested Citation

  • Bernardi, Roberta & Wu, Philip F., 2022. "Online health communities and the patient-doctor relationship: An institutional logics perspective," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:314:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622008000
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115494
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953622008000
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115494?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. Fox, N.J. & Ward, K.J. & O'Rourke, A.J., 2005. "The 'expert patient': empowerment or medical dominance? The case of weight loss, pharmaceutical drugs and the Internet," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 1299-1309, March.
    2. Lin, Xiaolin & Kishore, Rajiv, 2021. "Social media-enabled healthcare: A conceptual model of social media affordances, online social support, and health behaviors and outcomes," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    3. Stevenson, Fiona A. & Leydon-Hudson, Geraldine & Murray, Elizabeth & Seguin, Maureen & Barnes, Rebecca, 2021. "Patients’ use of the internet to negotiate about treatment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).
    4. Lemire, Marc & Sicotte, Claude & Paré, Guy, 2008. "Internet use and the logics of personal empowerment in health," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 130-140, October.
    5. Dedding, Christine & van Doorn, Roesja & Winkler, Lex & Reis, Ria, 2011. "How will e-health affect patient participation in the clinic? A review of e-health studies and the current evidence for changes in the relationship between medical professionals and patients," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 49-53, January.
    6. McDonald, Ruth & Checkland, Kath & Harrison, Stephen & Coleman, Anna, 2009. "Rethinking collegiality: Restratification in English general medical practice 2004-2008," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1199-1205, April.
    7. Petrakaki, Dimitra & Hilberg, Eva & Waring, Justin, 2018. "Between empowerment and self-discipline: Governing patients' conduct through technological self-care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 146-153.
    8. Koenig, Christopher J., 2011. "Patient resistance as agency in treatment decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(7), pages 1105-1114, April.
    9. De Rosis, Sabina & Barsanti, Sara, 2016. "Patient satisfaction, e-health and the evolution of the patient–general practitioner relationship: Evidence from an Italian survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(11), pages 1279-1292.
    10. van den Broek & Boselie & Paauwe, 2014. "Multiple Institutional Logics in Health Care: 'Productive Ward: Releasing Time to Care'," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 1-20, January.
    11. Harris, Rebecca & Holt, Robin, 2013. "Interacting institutional logics in general dental practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 63-70.
    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. Wei, Shuang & Mao, Yansheng, 2023. "Small talk is a big deal: A discursive analysis of online off-topic doctor-patient interaction in Traditional Chinese Medicine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 317(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. Schmidt, Henrike & Wild, Eva-Maria & Schreyögg, Jonas, 2021. "Explaining variation in health information seeking behaviour – Insights from a multilingual survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(5), pages 618-626.
    2. Tian, Xiaoli & Zhang, Sai, 2022. "Expert or experiential knowledge? How knowledge informs situated action in childcare practices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    3. De Rosis, Sabina & Barsanti, Sara, 2016. "Patient satisfaction, e-health and the evolution of the patient–general practitioner relationship: Evidence from an Italian survey," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(11), pages 1279-1292.
    4. Harris, Rebecca & Mosedale, Sarah & Garner, Jayne & Perkins, Elizabeth, 2014. "What factors influence the use of contracts in the context of NHS dental practice? A systematic review of theory and logic model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 54-59.
    5. Prior, Lindsay & Evans, Meirion R. & Prout, Hayley, 2011. "Talking about colds and flu: The lay diagnosis of two common illnesses among older British people," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 73(6), pages 922-928, September.
    6. Hajnal Noémi, 2017. "The Harmonization of Accounting," Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 5(1), pages 29-43, November.
    7. Tate, Alexandra, 2020. "Invoking death: How oncologists discuss a deadly outcome," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 246(C).
    8. Letizia Lo Presti & Mario Testa & Vittoria Marino & Pierpaolo Singer, 2019. "Engagement in Healthcare Systems: Adopting Digital Tools for a Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, January.
    9. Heritage, John & McArthur, Amanda, 2019. "The diagnostic moment: A study in US primary care," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 228(C), pages 262-271.
    10. Scavarda, Alice & Ariel Cascio, M., 2022. "Embracing and rejecting the medicalization of autism in Italy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 294(C).
    11. Wu, Jen-Her & Kao, Hao-Yun & Sambamurthy, Vallabh, 2016. "The integration effort and E-health compatibility effect and the mediating role of E-health synergy on hospital performance," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1288-1300.
    12. Kuchinskaya, Olga & Parker, Lisa S., 2018. "‘Recurrent losers unite’: Online forums, evidence-based activism, and pregnancy loss," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 216(C), pages 74-80.
    13. Murdoch, Jamie & Salter, Charlotte & Ford, John & Lenaghan, Elizabeth & Shiner, Alice & Steel, Nicholas, 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, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    14. Troels Kristensen & Kim Rose-Olsen & Christian Volmar Skovsgaard, 2020. "Effects of Point-Of-Care Testing in General Practice for Type 2 Diabetes Patients on Ambulatory Visits and Hospitalizations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-16, August.
    15. Adela Laura Popa & Naiana Nicoleta Ţarcă & Dinu Vlad Sasu & Simona Aurelia Bodog & Remus Dorel Roşca & Teodora Mihaela Tarcza, 2022. "Exploring Marketing Insights for Healthcare: Trends and Perspectives Based on Literature Investigation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-21, August.
    16. Salant, Talya & Santry, Heena P., 2006. "Internet marketing of bariatric surgery: Contemporary trends in the medicalization of obesity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(10), pages 2445-2457, May.
    17. Stacey, Clare Louise & Henderson, Stuart & MacArthur, Kelly R. & Dohan, Daniel, 2009. "Demanding patient or demanding encounter?: A case study of a cancer clinic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 729-737, September.
    18. Menon, Alka V., 2017. "Do online reviews diminish physician authority? The case of cosmetic surgery in the U.S," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 1-8.
    19. Moses, Aditya & Sharma, Amalesh, 2020. "What drives human resource acquisition and retention in social enterprises? An empirical investigation in the healthcare industry in an emerging market," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 76-88.
    20. McDonald, Ruth & Cheraghi-Sohi, Sudeh & Sanders, Caroline & Ashcroft, Darren, 2010. "Professional status in a changing world: The case of medicines use reviews in English community pharmacy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(3), pages 451-458, August.

    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:314:y:2022:i:c:s0277953622008000. 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.