Faculty Bibliography

E-mail has the potential to improve both the quality and efficiency of healthcare service delivery. Despite the substantial growth of this form of communication over the past decade, its promise to patients, providers, and their health plans remains largely untapped. In this article we (1) review the literature on e-mail use between patients and providers; (2) identify challenges and opportunities facing managed care organizations that wish to maximize the potential of this form of communication; (3) describe the components of 2 systems aimed at enhancing e-mail use in clinical settings; and (4) discuss the implications of increased e-mail use for managed care.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the language of "turfing," a ubiquitous term applied to some transfers of patients between physicians, in order to reveal aspects of the ideology of internal medicine residency. SETTING: Academic internal medicine training program. MEASUREMENTS: Using direct observation and a focus group, we collected audiotapes of medical residents' discussions of turfing. These data were analyzed using interpretive and conversation analytic methods. The focus group was used both to validate and to further elaborate a schematic conceptual framework for turfing. MAIN RESULTS: The decision to call a patient "turfed" depends on the balance of the values of effectiveness of therapy, continuity of care, and power. For example, if the receiving physician cannot provide a more effective therapy than can the transferring physician, medical residents consider the transfer inappropriate, and call the patient a turf. With appropriate transfers, these residents see their service as honorable, but with turfs, residents talk about the irresponsibility of transferring physicians, burdens of service, abuse, and powerlessness. CONCLUSIONS: Internal medicine residents can feel angry and frustrated about receiving patients perceived to be rejected by other doctors, and powerless to prevent the transfer of those patients for whom they may have no effective treatment or continuous relationship. This study has implications for further exploration of how the relationships between physicians may uphold or conflict with the underlying moral tenets of the medical profession.

The resurgence of tuberculosis (TB) in the early 1990s, including multidrug-resistant strains, led health officials to recommend the use of involuntary detention for persistently nonadherent patients. Using a series of recently published articles on the subject, this paper offers some opinions on how detention programs have balanced protection of the public's health with patients' civil liberties. Detained persons are more likely than other TB patients to come from socially disadvantaged groups. Health departments have generally used coercion appropriately, detaining patients as a last resort and providing them with due process. Yet health officials still retain great authority to bypass "least restrictive alternatives" in certain cases and to detain noninfectious patients for months or years. Misbehavior within institutions may inappropriately be used as a marker of future nonadherence with medications. As rates of TB and attention to the disease again decline, forcible confinement of sick patients should be reserved for those persons who truly threaten the public's health.

Women who test positive for a genetic breast cancer marker may have more than a 50% chance of developing the disease. Although past screening technologies have sought to identify actual breast cancers, as opposed to predisposition, the history of screening may help predict the societal response to genetic testing. For decades, educational messages have encouraged women to find breast cancers as early as possible. Such messages have fostered the popular assumption that immediately discovered and treated breast cancers are necessarily more curable. Research, however, has shown that screening improves the prognosis of some--but not all--breast cancers, and also that it may lead to unnecessary interventions. The dichotomy between the advertised value of early detection and its actual utility has caused particular controversy in the United States, where the cultural climate emphasizes the importance of obtaining all possible medical information and acting on it. Early detection has probably helped to lower overall breast cancer mortality. But it has proven hard to praise aggressive screening without exaggerating its merits. Women considering genetic breast cancer testing should weight the benefits and limitations of early knowledge.