Literature DB >> 29421457

Political economy of hope as a cultural facet of biomedicalization: A qualitative examination of constraints to hospice utilization among U.S. end-stage cancer patients.

Emily Hammad Mrig1, Karen Lutfey Spencer2.   

Abstract

A growing body of social science literature is devoted to describing processes of biomedicalization. The issue of biomedicalization is especially relevant for individuals suffering from end-stage cancer and hoping that aggressive end-of-life interventions, which are riddled with uncertainty around quantity or quality of life, will produce a 'cure'. To examine hospice underutilization among end-stage cancer patients, we apply the anthropological concept 'political economy of hope,' which describes how personal and collective 'hope' is associated with the political and economic structures that produce biomedicalization processes. Previous studies have examined hospice underutilization among end-stage cancer patients and have identified barriers stemming from patient and physician characteristics or health insurance reimbursement policies. Yet, these studies do not provide an organized synthesis of how barriers articulate, how they are part of the longitudinal decision-making process, or describe the sociocultural context surrounding hospice care enrollment decisions. This paper focuses on US-specific mechanisms and is based on qualitative, in-depth, interviews with physicians at an academic hospital (N = 24). We find that hospice underutilization results from a web of interconnected constraints surrounding end-stage cancer patients. Our research reveals how hospice care contradicts the political and economic structures associated with end-stage cancer care and illustrates how end-stage cancer patients are transformed into a form of biovalue, a fundamental commodity sustaining the political economy of hope.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomedicalization; Cancer; Hope; Hospice care; Political economy; Qualitative methods; United States

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29421457     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.01.033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  5 in total

1.  Association between advanced cancer patient-caregiver agreement regarding prognosis and hospice enrollment.

Authors:  Kelly M Trevino; Holly G Prigerson; Megan Johnson Shen; Daniel J Tancredi; Guibo Xing; Michael Hoerger; Ronald M Epstein; Paul R Duberstein
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2019-05-30       Impact factor: 6.860

2.  Invoking death: How oncologists discuss a deadly outcome.

Authors:  Alexandra Tate
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 4.634

3.  Challenges and facilitators of hospice decision-making: a retrospective review of family caregivers of home hospice patients in a rural US-Mexico border region-a qualitative study.

Authors:  Eunjeong Ko; Dahlia Fuentes; Savitri Singh-Carlson; Frances Nedjat-Haiem
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 4.  Holy Simplicity: The Physician's Role in End-of-Life Conversations.

Authors:  Joseph L Williams; Benjamin Doolittle
Journal:  Yale J Biol Med       Date:  2022-09-30

5.  Shades of hope: Marcel's notion of hope in end-of-life care.

Authors:  Marta Szabat; Jeanette Bresson Ladegaard Knox
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2021-06-25
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.