Is there any ideal of 'high quality care' opposing 'low quality care'? A deconstructionist reading.
The expressions 'high quality care' and 'low quality care' are cognitive and linguistic artefacts that help to structure people's lives and thinking; for example, moves are now afoot internationally to pay bonuses to health professionals for delivering high quality care. United States programmes, most conspicuously, are assuming that high quality care can be validly distinguished from low quality care, and incentivised through bonuses. This distinction is always at least implicit, for high quality care has no meaning without low quality care. Through a 'deconstructionist reading,' this article discusses limitations of categorising the quality of care as either high or low. The limitations of this 'binary opposition' can include a lack of defining attributes; vagueness and fuzziness at the 'boundaries' between high quality care and low quality care; concealment of quality as a continuum; and use of the binary opposition to effect social order and control. Health policy implications of our analysis are discussed. Drawing upon the general medical services contract in the United Kingdom, we suggest an approach to overcoming the oversimplification and imprecision that categorisation tends to produce.
Buetow
Stephen
S
General Practice and Primary Health Care, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand. s.buetow@auckland.ac.nz
Adams
Peter
P
D001294:Attitude to Health; D006291:Health Policy; D010686:Philosophy, Medical; D011787:Quality of Health Care; D012926:Social Control, Formal; D009626:Terminology as Topic