Main Article Content
The following paper deals with the issues of doctor’s image in the doctor-patient relationship in the Internet era and the influence of Internet on patient’s compliance. Both positive and negative standpoints have been discussed briefly, followed by a description of a research model proposed by Laugesen, Hassanein and Yufei (2015) applicable for this type of study. The study examines the impact of patients’ use of Internet health information on various elements of patient-doctor relation (including compliance) through a theoretical model based on principal-agent theory as well as the information asymmetry perspective. A pilot survey and interview study performed on one Polish doctor and a group of his patients, a specialist in Family Medicine has been described. The study carried out by three coworkers: Laugesen, Hassanein and Yufei (2015) revealed that patient-doctor concordance and perceived information asymmetry have relevant effects on patient’s compliance while patient-doctor concordance reveals a stronger relationship. The final conclusions were such that only doctor’s quality had a significant influence on the information asymmetry; the Internet health information gathered by a patient had no impact on perceived information asymmetry; the pilot study performed on the Polish physician confirms the theses presented in this paper but further investigations concerning the formerly discussed issues should be done.
Download data is not yet available.
Wiertlewska, J. (2019). The image of a doctor in a doctor-patient relationship in the Internet era. Scripta Neophilologica Posnaniensia, (18), 127-135. https://doi.org/10.14746/snp.2018.18.12
Prace publikowane w czasopiśmie dostępne są na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa - Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.
- Alwan, A, Armstrong, T, Cowan, M. and L. Riley (World Health Organization). 2011. Website Noncommunicable diseases country profiles 2011 http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publication/2011/9789241
- _eng.pdf?ua.1. D.O.A. 15th, May, 2017.
- Anderson, J.G, Rainey, M.R, and G. Eysenbach. 2003. “The impact of CyberHealthcare on the physician-patient relationship”. Journal of Medical Systems. 27 (1). 67–84.
- Broom, A. 2005. “Virtually healthy: the impact of internet use on disease experience and the doctorpatient relationship”. Quality Health Research 15 (3). 325–345.
- Burger, J.M., Messian, N., Patel, S. del Prado, A. and C. Anderson 2004. “What a coincidence! The effects of incidental similarity on compliance.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 30. 35-43.
- Di Matteo, M.R. 2004. “Variations in patients’ adherence to medical recommendations: a quantitative review of 50 years of research”. Med Care 42 (3). 200-209.
- Eisenhardt, K.M. 1989. “Agency theory: an assessment and review”. Academy of Management Review 14 (1). 57–74.
- Engel, G.L. 1980. “The clinical application of the biopsychosocial model”. American Journal of Psychiatry 137. 535–544.
- Evans, F.B. 1963. “Selling a dyadic relationship. A new approach”. American Behavioural Scientist 6. 76-79.
- Erdem, S.A. and L.J. Harrison-Walker 2006. “The role of the Internet in physician-patient relationships: The issue of trust”. Business Horizons 49 (5). 387-393.
- Fox, S. 2006. Online Health Search 2006. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project; 2006.http://www.pewinternet.org/2006/10/29/online-health-search-2006/. D.O.A. 2017-05-03.
- Iverson, S.A., Howard, K.B. and B.K. Penney. 2008. “Impact of Internet use on health-related behaviours and the patient-physician relationship: a survey-based study and review”. Journal of American Osteopathy Association 108 (12). 699–711.
- Johnson, G.L. and A. Ramaprasad. 2000. “Patient-physician relationships in the information age.” Mark Health Services 20 (1). 20–7.
- Jayanti, R.K. and T.W. Whipple. 2008. “Like me … like me not: the role of physician likability on service evaluations”. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice 16 (1).79–86.
- Kaba, R. and P. Sooriakumaran. 2007. „The evolution of the doctor-patient relationship”. Intern and Surgery Journal 5 (1). 57–65.
- Kim, J.H. and S. Park. 2011. “The effect of uniform virtual appearance on conformity intention: social model of deindivituation effects and optional distinction theory”. Computer in Human Behaviour 27. 1223-1230.
- Laugesen, J., Hassanein, K. and Y. Yufei. 2015. “The impact of Internet health information on patient compliance: a research model and an empirical study.” Journal of. Medical Internet Research 6. e143. Published online 2015 Jun 11. :10.2196/jmir.4333PMCID: PMC452693. D.O.A. 15th, May
- Murray, E., Lo, B., Pollack, L., Donelan, K., Catania, J., White, M., Zapert, K. and R. Turner. 2003. “The impact of health information on the Internet on the physician-patient relationship: patient perceptions”. Arch Intern Medicine 163 (14). 1727–34.
- Nwosu, C.R. and B.M. Cox. 2000. “The impact of the Internet on the doctor-patient relationship”. Health Informatics Journal 6 (3). 156–167.
- Osterberg, L. and T. Blaschke. 2005. “Adherence to medication”. New England Journal of Medicine 353 (5). 487–97.
- Pavlou, P., Liang, H. and Y. Xue. 2007 “Understanding and mitigating uncertainty in online exchange relationships: a principal-agent perspective”. MIS Quarterly 31 (1).105–136.
- Veatch, R.M. 1991. The physician-patient relation. The patient as partner, part 2. Bloomington and Indianapolis. Indiana University Press.
- Vick, S. and A. Scott. 1998. “Agency in health care. Examining patients’ preferences for attributes of the doctor-patient relationship”. Journal of Health Economy 17 (5). 587–605.
- Wroth, T.H. and D.E. Pathman. 2006. “Primary medication adherence in a rural population: the role of the patient-physician relationship and satisfaction with care.” Journal of American Medicine 19 (5). 478–86.
- Xie, B., Dilts, D.M. and M. Shor. 2006. „The physician-patient relationship: the impact of patientobtained medical information”. Health Economy 15 (8). 813–33.
- Zolnierek, K.B. and M.R. Domatteo. 2009. „Physicain communication and patient adherence to treatment:
- a meta-analysis.” Med Care 47 (8). 826-834.