守门人的困境:揭开全科医疗中低价值护理的复杂性。

IF 2.7 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Olivia Spalletta, Sara Green
{"title":"守门人的困境:揭开全科医疗中低价值护理的复杂性。","authors":"Olivia Spalletta, Sara Green","doi":"10.1111/1467-9566.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Low-value care (LVC) is increasingly the focus of debates on how to reduce the use of healthcare resources while maintaining quality care. General practitioners (GPs) are often considered central to this aim. Although GPs facilitate early disease detection, disease prevention and coordinated medical care, they must do so while aiming to protect both patients and the healthcare system from the harmful effects of medical overactivity. Public healthcare systems with gatekeeping practices, such as Denmark, lack many of the identified economic and structural incentives for LVC. Why then does LVC persist? Drawing on ethnographic observations and interviews with practising GPs, we explore how Danish GPs handle the difficult task of drawing a line between what requires medical attention and what should be left untreated or monitored. Our findings suggest that LVC literature may overlook the value of some interventions when used by GPs to improve patient trajectories over a longer term, maintain the relationship between patient and practitioner or balance the use of time and resources across the healthcare system. We clarify this point by unpacking the relational and context-dependent work of GPs, which is central to their capacity to serve as trusted gatekeepers.</p>","PeriodicalId":21685,"journal":{"name":"Sociology of health & illness","volume":"47 4","pages":"e70034"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11997420/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Gatekeeper's Dilemma: Unpacking the Complexity of Low-Value Care in General Practice.\",\"authors\":\"Olivia Spalletta, Sara Green\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-9566.70034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Low-value care (LVC) is increasingly the focus of debates on how to reduce the use of healthcare resources while maintaining quality care. General practitioners (GPs) are often considered central to this aim. Although GPs facilitate early disease detection, disease prevention and coordinated medical care, they must do so while aiming to protect both patients and the healthcare system from the harmful effects of medical overactivity. Public healthcare systems with gatekeeping practices, such as Denmark, lack many of the identified economic and structural incentives for LVC. Why then does LVC persist? Drawing on ethnographic observations and interviews with practising GPs, we explore how Danish GPs handle the difficult task of drawing a line between what requires medical attention and what should be left untreated or monitored. Our findings suggest that LVC literature may overlook the value of some interventions when used by GPs to improve patient trajectories over a longer term, maintain the relationship between patient and practitioner or balance the use of time and resources across the healthcare system. We clarify this point by unpacking the relational and context-dependent work of GPs, which is central to their capacity to serve as trusted gatekeepers.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21685,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"volume\":\"47 4\",\"pages\":\"e70034\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11997420/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociology of health & illness\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.70034\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociology of health & illness","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.70034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如何在保持高质量护理的同时减少医疗资源的使用,低价值护理(LVC)日益成为争论的焦点。全科医生(gp)通常被认为是实现这一目标的核心。尽管全科医生促进了疾病的早期发现、疾病预防和协调医疗,但他们必须在这样做的同时,保护患者和医疗保健系统免受医疗过度活跃的有害影响。丹麦等拥有把关实践的公共医疗体系缺乏许多已确定的LVC的经济和结构激励。那么,LVC为什么会持续存在呢?根据人种学观察和对执业全科医生的采访,我们探讨了丹麦全科医生如何处理在需要医疗照顾和应该不治疗或监测之间划清界限的艰巨任务。我们的研究结果表明,LVC文献可能忽略了一些干预措施的价值,这些干预措施被全科医生用于改善长期患者轨迹,维持患者和医生之间的关系,或平衡整个医疗保健系统的时间和资源使用。我们通过拆解全科医生的关系和上下文相关工作来澄清这一点,这对他们作为可信赖的看门人的能力至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Gatekeeper's Dilemma: Unpacking the Complexity of Low-Value Care in General Practice.

Low-value care (LVC) is increasingly the focus of debates on how to reduce the use of healthcare resources while maintaining quality care. General practitioners (GPs) are often considered central to this aim. Although GPs facilitate early disease detection, disease prevention and coordinated medical care, they must do so while aiming to protect both patients and the healthcare system from the harmful effects of medical overactivity. Public healthcare systems with gatekeeping practices, such as Denmark, lack many of the identified economic and structural incentives for LVC. Why then does LVC persist? Drawing on ethnographic observations and interviews with practising GPs, we explore how Danish GPs handle the difficult task of drawing a line between what requires medical attention and what should be left untreated or monitored. Our findings suggest that LVC literature may overlook the value of some interventions when used by GPs to improve patient trajectories over a longer term, maintain the relationship between patient and practitioner or balance the use of time and resources across the healthcare system. We clarify this point by unpacking the relational and context-dependent work of GPs, which is central to their capacity to serve as trusted gatekeepers.

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
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
6.90%
发文量
156
期刊介绍: Sociology of Health & Illness is an international journal which publishes sociological articles on all aspects of health, illness, medicine and health care. We welcome empirical and theoretical contributions in this field.
×
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