Search results

Fundholding (the opportunity to hold a budget at practice level) has given general practitioners (GPs) purchasing power for medical services within the reformed UK National Health Service (NHS). This new purchasing power equates to financial leverage with the NHS consultants in hospitals. Argues that fundholding is presented as an opportunity for GPs to engage in a “turf battle” with the hospital consultants without this battle becoming publicly visible. Fundholding as an accounting‐based intervention masked the nature of the professional challenge which GPs launched against the consultants and, hence, allowed territorial claims to be renegotiated through the medium of contracting. This circumvented the damage to medical professional ideologies which would have ensued if intra‐professional conflicts had become overt. The empirical study which is referred to indicates that GPs are using contracts to improve processes of case management at the hospital interface (an area where consultants have failed to communicate with GPs) and to have an input into the setting of quality standards within the hospitals. The increased financial flexibility conferred through holding budgets is also enabling GPs to expand in‐house services for primary care. Theorizes the changing power relations between GPs and consultants through exploring four dimensions of intra‐professional differentiation: task specialization; client differentiation; organization of work; and career pattern. Concludes that budgets have constituted a catalyst for professional development through reconnecting the monetary bonds between the polarized professionals in British medicine. This study indicates that, as fundholding progresses, the boundary between primary and secondary care is becoming blurred; that lead fundholding GPs are being managerialized; and that the purchasing dialogue between the GPs and the Trusts is marginalizing the role of the Health Boards (bodies which had previously held sole responsibility for the co‐ordination and delivery of health care but which now have a more limited purchasing/commissioning role).

The purpose of this paper is to show that networks are emerging as a new, innovative organisational form in the UK public sector. The emergence of more network‐based modes of organisation is apparent across many public services in the UK but has been particularly evident in the health sector or NHS. Cancer services represent an important and early example, where managed clinical networks (MCNs) for cancer have been established by the UK National Health Service (NHS) as a means of streamlining patient pathways and fostering the flow of knowledge and good practice between the many different professions and organisations involved in care. There is very little understanding of the role of power in public sector networks, and in particular MCNs. This paper aims to explore and theorise the nature of power relations within a network model of governance.

The paper discusses evidence from five case studies of MCNs for cancer in London.

The findings in this paper demonstrate that a model of bounded pluralism can be used to understand power relations within London MCNs. However, power over the development of policy and strategic direction is instead exerted in a top‐down manner by the government (e.g. Department of Health) and its associated national bodies.

The paper supports the argument that the introduction of rhetoric of a more collaborative approach to the management of public services has not been enough to destabilise the embedded managerialist framework.

This paper uses empirical data from five case studies of managed clinical networks to theorise the nature of power relations in the development and implementation of network reform in cancer services. Also, there is limited understanding of the nature of power relations in network relationships, particularly in relation to the public sector.

Much of the body of literature analysing the gig economy focuses on its exploitation of low-wage workers and its role in increasing precarious work. This chapter approaches the topic from a different angle, focussing on the contribution of the gig economy to the declining power of the medical profession. As well as facilitating and promulgating contingent work in healthcare, the gig economy disaggregates medical work into isolated on-demand micro-tasks on digital platforms. This has implications for the status and power of the medical profession, the doctor–patient relationship, and inter-professional boundaries in healthcare. The mechanisms through which these dynamics unfold, as well as the inter-related factors that support the transformations in the allocation and content of medical work, are discussed. These include the implications of heightened transparency of medical work resulting from unbundling of jobs, commodification of medical professionals, and platform-based vulnerabilities such as rating systems that impact doctor–patient relationships. Closure theory is drawn on to illuminate the dynamics of the transformation in professional boundaries and the arising conflict that it entails for the healthcare workforce at different levels. The conflict is theorised as an insidious exercise of closure by allied health professionals on the remit of the medical profession, which challenges remuneration, authority, and other exclusionary benefits traditionally accrued to the medical profession.

To examine how art is shaped by war, outside of the official commemorative projects of the First World War. The purpose of this paper is to examine the experience of a surgeon/artist who knew first-hand the horror of industrial scale of destruction. It speculates on how his medical education and surgical knowledge in the treatment of the casualties informed his art and considers how such scientific discourses may have contributed to a new modernist language.

The double career of J.W. Power – a surgeon then an artist – provides a case study to probe such questions. The paper speculates about the connections between these different careers, and considers the implications of becoming an artist for someone who had pre-war university-training, medical expertise and experience as a war surgeon. In particular, consideration is given to how surgical knowledge and contemporary medical debates may have informed a group of later paintings.

A group of J.W. Power’s late paintings stand apart from his other subjects as they suggest states of physical or psychological damage. Indeed by the 1930s shell shock was recognised as a war-related psychological injury. These paintings then may not only be an act of remembrance, but also potentially a reflection on that new discourse.

It remains a compelling idea that by the 1930s Power had found a modern abstract language capable of revisiting the traumatic subject of his hospital sketches. The implications of the war-time surgery on his art was delayed and remains highly ambiguous, however it invites, indeed encourages, such speculation.

The paper is the first to examine the cultural impact of the medical career of the artist J.W. Power. His medical training and experience as a war-time surgeon is shown to have been significant to his later painting, for he knew the regenerative powers of modern surgery, of how such knowledge had the power to repair and to heal.

Key forces shaping higher education drive institutions to make strategic choices to locate themselves in niches where they can make use of their resources effectively and efficiently. However, the concepts of strategy and strategic positioning in higher education are contested issues due to the nature and complexity of the sector and the university. As an industry facing increasing pressure toward marketization and competition, this study calls for an analysis of higher education, as an industry, in a more business-oriented framework. This chapter makes a contribution to scholarly research in higher education by applying Porter’s five forces framework to medical education. In doing so, it provides a foundational perspective on the competitive landscape, its environment, its organizations, and the groups and individuals that make up the higher and medical education sector.

How is medical knowledge produced and what are the implications of that knowledge production for medical practice? Using theoretical ideas on evidence-based medicine, standardization in medical research and practice, and biopower, I examine the relationship between medical knowledge and medical practice through the case of pelvic pain care in the US.

Data from ethnographic observations at two medical conferences as well as interviews with healthcare providers inform a critical analysis of the medical discourse.

The analysis reveals how evidence-based medicine is practiced in the context of medical conditions that lack objective evidence, as well as the unintended consequences of such practices. I provide an alternative approach to medical practice for conditions lacking traditional evidence through presenting outlier cases in the data.

In doing so, I make the broad theoretical argument that biomedical paradigms must emerge through the critical process of negative dialectics in order to reach past the limits of standardized medical care.

In sociologically analyzing the case of pelvic pain care, I reveal dire limits in the evidence-based approach to medical care for conditions and symptoms that may be deemed medical anomalies, demanding an alternative approach to care for such conditions.

The authors contribute to scholarly understanding of the interplay between macro-level institutions and micro-level action by focusing attention on the ways the power of institutions works through mundane organizational spaces to constrain individuals as they interact with organizations. The authors explore these macro- and micro-connections between institutions and organizational spaces through a qualitative inductive study of an emergency department in a public hospital in Australia. Analyzing observational and interview data related to a waiting room and a corridor, their findings show how the systemic power of the state and the medical profession impacts micro-level action through organizational spaces. The authors find that the medical profession exerted power in a system of domination over marginalized patients through the waiting room as an exclusion space. At the same time, the state exerted discipline power over professional subjects through the corridor as a surveillance space. Individual resistance to institutional power over the ED was controlled by policing deviance in the surveillance space and ejecting resisters to the exclusion space. Their findings contribute to the literature by opening up new insight into how mundane organizational spaces convey institutional power by dominating and disciplining micro-level actions.

The purpose of this paper is to unpack the tenuous relationship between medical sociology and disability studies, particularly as it relates to the work of Irving Zola.

Many attribute the division between these disciplines to their starkly different and oft competing approaches to disability; however, I argue that a closer examination reveals a number of commonalities between the two.

I use Irving K. Zola’s extensive body of scholarship to demonstrate the connections between these divergent approaches to disability, and imagine what his legacy has to offer to the advancement of a diverse sociology of disability.

Neither focus is more correct than the other, as considering these bodies of work together presents a number of opportunities to advance a more comprehensive sociological theory – not just of disability – but of ableism and its intersections with other forms of oppression as well.