在线患者工作

C. Stage, A. Karlsson, L. Ledderer
{"title":"在线患者工作","authors":"C. Stage, A. Karlsson, L. Ledderer","doi":"10.47368/ejhc.2024.203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Patients in Western countries increasingly experience a lack of continuity of care. The aim of this article is to understand how patients with one or more chronic conditions handle and prevent experiences of discontinuity of care by engaging in collaborative – and most often systemically invisible – patient work in peer-led online communities (PLOCs). The article’s analysis is based on 20 interviews with users of two Danish PLOCs and finds that care continuity is primarily addressed in its absence; that is when it has been lacking in systemic experiences, or when discontinuity is anticipated or feared in future encounters. The analysis shows that the collaborative patient work done in online communities can be understood as patients’ attempts to mend discontinuities produced by health institutions. Three dominant mending practices are (1) to interpret or vent systemic information to increase collective understanding and decrease frustration, (2) to prepare for encounters with the system to enable them to be more effective, and (3) to push the system to improve decisions and services linked to treatment and care. Considering these findings, the article concludes that there is a need to acknowledge the collaborative work of patients in PLOCs as an informal contributor to continuity of care.","PeriodicalId":504966,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Communication","volume":"18 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Online Patient Work\",\"authors\":\"C. Stage, A. Karlsson, L. Ledderer\",\"doi\":\"10.47368/ejhc.2024.203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Patients in Western countries increasingly experience a lack of continuity of care. The aim of this article is to understand how patients with one or more chronic conditions handle and prevent experiences of discontinuity of care by engaging in collaborative – and most often systemically invisible – patient work in peer-led online communities (PLOCs). The article’s analysis is based on 20 interviews with users of two Danish PLOCs and finds that care continuity is primarily addressed in its absence; that is when it has been lacking in systemic experiences, or when discontinuity is anticipated or feared in future encounters. The analysis shows that the collaborative patient work done in online communities can be understood as patients’ attempts to mend discontinuities produced by health institutions. Three dominant mending practices are (1) to interpret or vent systemic information to increase collective understanding and decrease frustration, (2) to prepare for encounters with the system to enable them to be more effective, and (3) to push the system to improve decisions and services linked to treatment and care. Considering these findings, the article concludes that there is a need to acknowledge the collaborative work of patients in PLOCs as an informal contributor to continuity of care.\",\"PeriodicalId\":504966,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Health Communication\",\"volume\":\"18 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Health Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2024.203\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47368/ejhc.2024.203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

西方国家的患者越来越多地经历缺乏连续性护理的问题。本文旨在了解患有一种或多种慢性疾病的患者如何通过参与同伴主导的在线社区(PLOCs)中的协作性患者工作(通常是系统性隐形工作)来处理和预防护理不连续的经历。文章的分析基于对两个丹麦 PLOCs 用户的 20 次访谈,发现护理连续性问题主要是在缺乏护理连续性的情况下解决的;也就是说,在系统性经验中缺乏护理连续性,或者在预期或担心未来护理不连续的情况下解决的。分析表明,在线社区中的患者协作工作可以理解为患者试图修补医疗机构造成的不连续性。三种主要的修补做法是:(1) 解释或宣泄系统信息,以增加集体理解,减少挫败感;(2) 为与系统的接触做好准备,使其更有效;(3) 推动系统改善与治疗和护理相关的决策和服务。考虑到这些发现,文章得出结论认为,有必要承认 PLOCs 中患者的协作工作是对持续护理的非正式贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Online Patient Work
Patients in Western countries increasingly experience a lack of continuity of care. The aim of this article is to understand how patients with one or more chronic conditions handle and prevent experiences of discontinuity of care by engaging in collaborative – and most often systemically invisible – patient work in peer-led online communities (PLOCs). The article’s analysis is based on 20 interviews with users of two Danish PLOCs and finds that care continuity is primarily addressed in its absence; that is when it has been lacking in systemic experiences, or when discontinuity is anticipated or feared in future encounters. The analysis shows that the collaborative patient work done in online communities can be understood as patients’ attempts to mend discontinuities produced by health institutions. Three dominant mending practices are (1) to interpret or vent systemic information to increase collective understanding and decrease frustration, (2) to prepare for encounters with the system to enable them to be more effective, and (3) to push the system to improve decisions and services linked to treatment and care. Considering these findings, the article concludes that there is a need to acknowledge the collaborative work of patients in PLOCs as an informal contributor to continuity of care.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信