日间节目的多重性:非一致性与本体论政治。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-07-29 DOI:10.1177/13634593221116501
Holly Symonds-Brown, Christine Ceci
{"title":"日间节目的多重性:非一致性与本体论政治。","authors":"Holly Symonds-Brown, Christine Ceci","doi":"10.1177/13634593221116501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Globally, day programs are increasingly proposed in policy as one way to address the support needs of people living at home with dementia and their families. Day programs represent a kind of space that can meet multiple interests and ideologies concerned with sustaining care at home for people living with dementia. In this paper, we draw on findings from an ethnographic study of how day programs work as care in the community for people living with dementia to argue that day programs' ontological status in research as a \"simple location\" of care contributes to the ambiguous outcomes and limited evidence available for improving their design and delivery. Using one program as an illustrative case, we demonstrate the multiplicity of a day program and the ontological politics through which the potentialities for care emerge. Robert Cooper's proximal analysis of organizing's and Annemarie Mol's work on ontological politics inform this analysis. Of note in this analysis are the different enactments of a day program and their modes of coordination. We show when these enactments hang together well and when they do not and consider the effects of these politics for care. Of particular concern is how some versions of a day program are easily displaced by the interests of administrative versions and managerial logics. We argue for approaches to research and planning that acknowledge the \"day program multiple\" and precarious nature of care.</p>","PeriodicalId":12944,"journal":{"name":"Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10714689/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The day program multiple: Noncoherence and ontological politics.\",\"authors\":\"Holly Symonds-Brown, Christine Ceci\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13634593221116501\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Globally, day programs are increasingly proposed in policy as one way to address the support needs of people living at home with dementia and their families. Day programs represent a kind of space that can meet multiple interests and ideologies concerned with sustaining care at home for people living with dementia. In this paper, we draw on findings from an ethnographic study of how day programs work as care in the community for people living with dementia to argue that day programs' ontological status in research as a \\\"simple location\\\" of care contributes to the ambiguous outcomes and limited evidence available for improving their design and delivery. Using one program as an illustrative case, we demonstrate the multiplicity of a day program and the ontological politics through which the potentialities for care emerge. Robert Cooper's proximal analysis of organizing's and Annemarie Mol's work on ontological politics inform this analysis. Of note in this analysis are the different enactments of a day program and their modes of coordination. We show when these enactments hang together well and when they do not and consider the effects of these politics for care. Of particular concern is how some versions of a day program are easily displaced by the interests of administrative versions and managerial logics. We argue for approaches to research and planning that acknowledge the \\\"day program multiple\\\" and precarious nature of care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12944,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10714689/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593221116501\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/7/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593221116501","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在全球范围内,政策中越来越多地提议将日间项目作为满足居家老年痴呆症患者及其家人支持需求的一种方式。日间项目代表着一种空间,它可以满足多种利益和意识形态,这些利益和意识形态都与在家中持续照顾痴呆症患者有关。在本文中,我们通过对日间项目如何在社区中为痴呆症患者提供照护的人种学研究结果,指出日间项目在研究中的本体地位是一种 "简单的照护场所",这导致了其结果的模糊性,以及在改进其设计和实施方面的证据的有限性。我们以一个日间项目为例,展示了日间项目的多重性和本体论政治,通过这种政治,护理的潜力得以显现。罗伯特-库珀(Robert Cooper)对组织化的近端分析和安玛莉-莫尔(Annemarie Mol)对本体论政治的研究为本分析提供了参考。在这一分析中,值得注意的是日间项目的不同表现形式及其协调模式。我们展示了这些模式在什么情况下能很好地结合在一起,什么情况下不能,并考虑了这些政治对护理的影响。特别值得关注的是,日间项目的某些版本是如何轻易地被行政版本和管理逻辑的利益所取代的。我们主张研究和规划的方法应承认 "日间项目的多重性 "和护理的不稳定性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The day program multiple: Noncoherence and ontological politics.

Globally, day programs are increasingly proposed in policy as one way to address the support needs of people living at home with dementia and their families. Day programs represent a kind of space that can meet multiple interests and ideologies concerned with sustaining care at home for people living with dementia. In this paper, we draw on findings from an ethnographic study of how day programs work as care in the community for people living with dementia to argue that day programs' ontological status in research as a "simple location" of care contributes to the ambiguous outcomes and limited evidence available for improving their design and delivery. Using one program as an illustrative case, we demonstrate the multiplicity of a day program and the ontological politics through which the potentialities for care emerge. Robert Cooper's proximal analysis of organizing's and Annemarie Mol's work on ontological politics inform this analysis. Of note in this analysis are the different enactments of a day program and their modes of coordination. We show when these enactments hang together well and when they do not and consider the effects of these politics for care. Of particular concern is how some versions of a day program are easily displaced by the interests of administrative versions and managerial logics. We argue for approaches to research and planning that acknowledge the "day program multiple" and precarious nature 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
Health
Health Multiple-
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Health: is published four times per year and attempts in each number to offer a mix of articles that inform or that provoke debate. The readership of the journal is wide and drawn from different disciplines and from workers both inside and outside the health care professions. Widely abstracted, Health: ensures authors an extensive and informed readership for their work. It also seeks to offer authors as short a delay as possible between submission and publication. Most articles are reviewed within 4-6 weeks of submission and those accepted are published within a year of that decision.
×
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