Cargando…

Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas

This study aims to analyze whether the rehabilitation of cancer surviving patients (CSPs) can be better organized. The data for this paper consists of focus group interviews (FGIs) with CSPs, general practitioners (GPs) and hospital physicians. The analysis draws on the theoretical framework of Jürg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mikkelsen, Thorbjørn H, Soendergaard, Jens, Jensen, Anders B, Olesen, Frede
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2008
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2435108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18538001
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-122
_version_ 1782156466384273408
author Mikkelsen, Thorbjørn H
Soendergaard, Jens
Jensen, Anders B
Olesen, Frede
author_facet Mikkelsen, Thorbjørn H
Soendergaard, Jens
Jensen, Anders B
Olesen, Frede
author_sort Mikkelsen, Thorbjørn H
collection PubMed
description This study aims to analyze whether the rehabilitation of cancer surviving patients (CSPs) can be better organized. The data for this paper consists of focus group interviews (FGIs) with CSPs, general practitioners (GPs) and hospital physicians. The analysis draws on the theoretical framework of Jürgen Habermas, utilizing his notions of 'the system and the life world' and 'communicative and strategic action'. In Habermas' terminology, the social security system and the healthcare system are subsystems that belong to what he calls the 'system', where actions are based on strategic actions activated by the means of media such as money and power which provide the basis for other actors' actions. The social life, on the other hand, in Habermas' terminology, belongs to what he calls the 'life world', where communicative action is based on consensual coordination among individuals. Our material suggests that, within the hospital world, the strategic actions related to diagnosis, treatment and cure in the biomedical discourse dominate. They function as inclusion/exclusion criteria for further treatment. However, the GPs appear to accept the CSPs' previous cancer diagnosis as a precondition sufficient for providing assistance. Although the GPs use the biomedical discourse and often give biomedical examples to exemplify rehabilitation needs, they find psychosocial aspects, so-called lifeworld aspects, to be an important component of their job when helping CSPs. In this way, they appear more open to communicative action in relation to the CSPs' lifeworld than do the hospital physicians. Our data also suggests that the CSPs' lifeworld can be partly colonized by the system during hospitalization, making it difficult for CSPs when they are discharged at the end of treatment. This situation seems to be crucial to our understanding of why CSPs often feel left in limbo after discharge. We conclude that the distinction between the system and the lifeworld and the implications of a possible colonization during hospitalization offers an important theoretical framework for determining and addressing different types of rehabilitation needs.
format Text
id pubmed-2435108
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2008
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-24351082008-06-21 Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas Mikkelsen, Thorbjørn H Soendergaard, Jens Jensen, Anders B Olesen, Frede BMC Health Serv Res Research Article This study aims to analyze whether the rehabilitation of cancer surviving patients (CSPs) can be better organized. The data for this paper consists of focus group interviews (FGIs) with CSPs, general practitioners (GPs) and hospital physicians. The analysis draws on the theoretical framework of Jürgen Habermas, utilizing his notions of 'the system and the life world' and 'communicative and strategic action'. In Habermas' terminology, the social security system and the healthcare system are subsystems that belong to what he calls the 'system', where actions are based on strategic actions activated by the means of media such as money and power which provide the basis for other actors' actions. The social life, on the other hand, in Habermas' terminology, belongs to what he calls the 'life world', where communicative action is based on consensual coordination among individuals. Our material suggests that, within the hospital world, the strategic actions related to diagnosis, treatment and cure in the biomedical discourse dominate. They function as inclusion/exclusion criteria for further treatment. However, the GPs appear to accept the CSPs' previous cancer diagnosis as a precondition sufficient for providing assistance. Although the GPs use the biomedical discourse and often give biomedical examples to exemplify rehabilitation needs, they find psychosocial aspects, so-called lifeworld aspects, to be an important component of their job when helping CSPs. In this way, they appear more open to communicative action in relation to the CSPs' lifeworld than do the hospital physicians. Our data also suggests that the CSPs' lifeworld can be partly colonized by the system during hospitalization, making it difficult for CSPs when they are discharged at the end of treatment. This situation seems to be crucial to our understanding of why CSPs often feel left in limbo after discharge. We conclude that the distinction between the system and the lifeworld and the implications of a possible colonization during hospitalization offers an important theoretical framework for determining and addressing different types of rehabilitation needs. BioMed Central 2008-06-06 /pmc/articles/PMC2435108/ /pubmed/18538001 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-122 Text en Copyright © 2008 Mikkelsen et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mikkelsen, Thorbjørn H
Soendergaard, Jens
Jensen, Anders B
Olesen, Frede
Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas
title Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas
title_full Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas
title_fullStr Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas
title_full_unstemmed Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas
title_short Cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from Habermas
title_sort cancer surviving patients' rehabilitation – understanding failure through application of theoretical perspectives from habermas
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2435108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18538001
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-8-122
work_keys_str_mv AT mikkelsenthorbjørnh cancersurvivingpatientsrehabilitationunderstandingfailurethroughapplicationoftheoreticalperspectivesfromhabermas
AT soendergaardjens cancersurvivingpatientsrehabilitationunderstandingfailurethroughapplicationoftheoreticalperspectivesfromhabermas
AT jensenandersb cancersurvivingpatientsrehabilitationunderstandingfailurethroughapplicationoftheoreticalperspectivesfromhabermas
AT olesenfrede cancersurvivingpatientsrehabilitationunderstandingfailurethroughapplicationoftheoreticalperspectivesfromhabermas