Medical technology and professional dominance theory
Ann Lennarson Greer
Social Science & Medicine, 1984, vol. 18, issue 10, 809-817
Abstract:
The expansion of medical technology in hospitals is commonly asserted to be a result of the preferences of medical doctors translated into organizational policies as a result of professional dominance in health care organizations. This paper examines the theoretical and empirical bases for hypotheses of professional dominance and the utility of these hypotheses in explaining hospital decisions to adopt new medical technologies. The analysis, which is based on 5 years of data collection including 378 personal interviews at 25 U.S. hospitals, indicates that appropriate application of the concept requires specification of the type of physician exercising influence and of the hospital decision systems within which it is exercised. Specification is needed because neither physicians nor hospitals are unitary categories when considered in relation to technology adoptions. In this paper, four categories of physicians are identified: community generalists, community specialists, referral specialists and hospital-based specialists. Members of these categories exhibit different skills and interests, different relationships to hospitalstechnologies, and differential access to the resources of organization influence including two unrelated to professional dominance. To understand the exercise of physician influence, it is further useful to differentiate three decision systems which review and pass judgement on different types of hospital technologies. They are: the medical-individualistic, the fiscal-managerial and the strategic-institutional. The three decision systems make decisions in accord with different values and goals and display different decision structures and dynamics. Ironically, the physicians who most clearly possess the resources of influence associated with professional dominance are centrally involved in only one of the three systems. They play only minor roles in the two which make the most far reaching and costly technological decisions.
Date: 1984
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)
Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(84)90148-5
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
HTML/Text
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:socmed:v:18:y:1984:i:10:p:809-817
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional
http://www.elsevier. ... _01_ooc_1&version=01
Access Statistics for this article
Social Science & Medicine is currently edited by Ichiro (I.) Kawachi and S.V. (S.V.) Subramanian
More articles in Social Science & Medicine from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().