Search results

This study illustrates that differences across health-related websites, as well as different Internet usage patterns, have significant implications for how individuals view and interact with their health care providers.

We rely on a qualitative study of three health-related websites and an ordinary least squares regression analysis of survey data to explore how websites with different organizational motives frame health-related issues and how variations in Internet usage patterns affect patients’ perceptions of the patient-doctor interaction.

Results reveal differences across three health-related websites and show that both the number and the type of websites patients visit affect their perceptions of physicians’ responses. Specifically, visiting multiple websites decreased perceptions of how well doctors listened to or answered patients’ questions, whereas using nonprofit or government health-related websites increased evaluations of how well doctors listened to and answered questions.

This study suggests that practitioners and scholars should look more closely at how patients use the Internet to understand how it affects doctor-patient interactions. Future research could expand the analysis of website framing or use methods such as in-depth interviewing to more fully understand on-the-ground processes and mechanisms.

This study highlights the importance of fleshing out nuances about what it means to be an Internet-informed patient given that varying patterns of Internet use may affect how patients perceive their physicians.

Purpose: The Internet provides patients easy access to scientific information originally, limited to medical professionals. However, this information may not be entirely relevant to the patient’s context. Therefore, doctor–patient conversations need to contextualize this information to the specific circumstances of the patient’s illness. A problem exists insofar as this conversation may not always meet the patient’s expectations. Interpersonal competence, an important aspect of emotional intelligence, is therefore critical for medical practice in the digital era. “Medicine” is viewed as a “masculine” profession requiring competence, while compassion as “feminine”. Gender stereotyped socialization prescribes gender - congruent emotional display norms for men and women thereby, influencing both gender behavior and emotions. Psychological androgyny is the coexistence of masculine and feminine behavior traits in the same individual irrespective of biological sex. This leads to responses, which are appropriate for situations irrespective of biological sex, rather than gender-stereotyped behaviour. In this study, I explored the role of gender personality and interpersonal competence in doctor–patient interaction.

Design/ methodology/approach: Sixty Indian doctors across different specializations completed the self-report format of emotional intelligence appraisal (Emotional Intelligence Appraisal-EIA) as measure of interpersonal competence and Bem’s Sex role Inventory (BSRI) as a measure of psychological androgyny.

Findings: Psychologically androgynous doctors scored significantly higher on interpersonal competence than non-androgynous doctors.

Practical implication: Since both male and female doctors undergo similar training, there is a need to explore in greater depth the nature of the relationship between androgynous gender behaviors in doctors and corresponding interpersonal competence correlates, to understand their impact on patient care and healthcare related outcomes for both patients and doctors. This is especially critical because, in addition to increasing incidents of violence against doctors in Internet-empowered world, previous research also points to varying patient outcomes and legal complications based on biological sex of doctors.

Medical encounters are interactional/interpersonal processes taking place within contexts shaped by macro-level social structures. In the case of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), medical encounters occur at a stigmatized crossroads of social control and gendered norms of sexual behavior. When women are diagnosed and treated for chronic STDs, practitioner demeanor has an important impact on how patients will view not only their health status but also their moral status. This chapter draws on in depth interviews with 40 women diagnosed with genital infections of herpes and/or human papillomavirus (HPV – the cause of genital warts) to explore three models of patient–practitioner interaction. The analysis focuses on the relationship between gender, construction of illness, and practitioner interaction style. In a broader context, the health risks posed by particular interaction styles to female STD patients shed light on larger public health implications of combining morality with medicine for the broader range of patients with stigmatizing diagnoses.

Using data from the General Social Survey (2002), structural equation modeling is employed to examine the intersections and relationships between various socio-demographic and contextual variables, patient trust, and patient preference for behaviors that indicate a desire to be an active health care participant. In so doing, a gap in the literature is addressed by uniting previous research on patient trust with research on patient participation. Findings reveal that patient trust in doctors and various socio-demographic and contextual variables are associated with people wanting to participate in the health care process by learning about medical issues on their own and by contributing to medical decisions. Results also shed new light on past research, which finds a relationship between various socio-demographic variables and patient trust. Specifically, they highlight the importance of distinguishing between patient trust in doctors and patient trust in the broader health care institution and the economic pressures it exerts on doctors. A discussion of what these findings might mean for our understanding of the doctor-patient relationship and the delivery of health care concludes the chapter.

This chapter is about the work that patients do to present themselves to their doctors as certain kinds of patients. The concept of “the task of doing: ‘being a good patient’“ is used to emphasize that patient self-presentation in medical interactions is not a static patient attribute but is rather a dynamic activity that patients and doctors negotiate during the medical encounter. Data segments of doctor-patient symptom-reporting interactions from a conventional and an unconventional medical setting are used to examine how differences in patient symptom reports in the two settings are linked to differences in the ways the patient and doctor orient to “the task of doing: ‘being a good patient’.” The analysis of these data segments suggests further that asymmetry in interaction in conventional settings limits, while mutuality in the unconventional setting promotes, the transfer of information between doctor and patient.