Published eLetters
If you would like to comment on this article, click on Submit a Response to This article, below. We welcome your input.
Jump to comment:
- Page navigation anchor for RE: "Physician", not "provider"RE: "Physician", not "provider"
The article by Drs. Diaz and Johnson, like so many similar pieces that have come forth over the past few decades, was very appropriate and appreciated.
As they noted, other professional organizations and publications have vowed to abjure the term “provider” when referring to physicians. This is helpful, though it is still a relatively small number of entities that have taken this step. It would further the cause if those that have expounded their policy of a more precise terminology, such as the AAFP, JAMA, and AFMRD, would recommend that their constituent members take similar action. Leading by example is critical, but urging others to follow suit will likely hasten the time when a clearer description of medical professionals becomes the norm, to the benefit of the general public, our patients, and our fellow physicians. Thus far, I have not seen any of the aforementioned organizations explicitly advocate this course of action amongst their members.
The Viewpoint in JAMA by Beasley et. al. sums up the course that should be taken:
"Professional societies should adopt these changes in language as universal professional standards and implement an action plan to apply them, starting at the national level and also involving state and local entities, industry, and ultimately individual practices."
Beasley JW, Roberts RG, Goroll AH. Promoting trust and morale by changing how the word provider is used: encouraging specificity an...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: "Patients," not "Consumers"RE: "Patients," not "Consumers"
I was recently reflecting again on the use of the term consumers to refer to persons utilizing medical services. As the number of administrators in medicine has increased exponentially, we have been advised for several decades to refer to patients as consumers. But, "healthcare consumers" definitely introduces a very transactional relationship based on economics and money, not a caring relationship over time. While, we want to avoid a paternalistic attitude toward patients, referring to them as consumers does not foster an atmosphere of earnest concern or attention for those in our care, who often are suffering. When one is a patient, it is understood that one needs assistance and protection due to a diminished state of health. Patients need our help and care as physicians, not providers of some saleable good or service.
Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Caring Clinicians, not Productive “Providers.”RE: Caring Clinicians, not Productive “Providers.”
An interesting and appalling history of the use of "Provider" in Nazi Germany per an article by Drs. Mangione, Mandell, and Post published in the American Journal of Medicine - https://www.amjmed.com/article/S0002-9343(21)00442-3/fulltext
"And here is the irony of “providers.” The term was first introduced by the Nazis in the 1930s when trying to debase German physicians of Jewish descent. There were 1253 pediatricians in Hitler's Reich, and almost half were considered Jewish by the Nuremberg Laws of 1935. When the Nazis ascended to power in 1933, the German Society of Pediatrics asked these physicians to resign. By 1938 the government simply revoked their licenses, so that instead of being called “Arzt” (ie, “doctors”) they were demoted to “Krankenbehandler,” that is, mere “practitioners” or “health care providers.” The term “Krankenbehandler” ultimately was applied to all German physicians of Jewish descent. Not only did they have to put it on their prescription pads, letterheads, and practice signs, but they also had to display it with a Star of David and the specification that they could only treat Jews. Soon after, mass deportations began. Words have societal implications."
Competing Interests: None declared. - Page navigation anchor for RE: Caring Clinicians, not Productive “Providers.”RE: Caring Clinicians, not Productive “Providers.”
The words we use matter, particularly for caring professionals and responsible leaders. Many thanks to the Association of Family Medicine Residency Directors (1) for officially discouraging the use of the pernicious P-word – “provider.” (2) The term “provider” has become a corporatespeak tool to dehumanize and commoditize both professionals and patients. A provider feels more impersonal than a doctor, nurse practitioner, or counselor. The impersonal becomes the interchangeable, more manageable, and more profitable. Provider contracts are more manageable than caring relationships. (3) The peril of “provider” is a problem we share across medical specialties (4) and healthcare professions (5), and with the patients and communities we serve. (3) All will be better served if we reject generalized labels in favor of language that is accurate, descriptive, transparent, and caring. (6)
References
1. Diaz KM, Johnson KE. “Physician,” not “provider.” Ann Fam Med 2022;20:582. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.2913.
2. Phillips WR. The P-word should be professional, not provider [Comment]. Beasley JW, Roberts RG, Goroll AH. Promoting trust and morale by changing how the word provider is used. Encouraging specificity and transparency. JAMA. 2021; published online May 28. DOI:10.1001/jama.2021.6046. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047757/
3. Phillips WR. Watchin...
Show MoreCompeting Interests: None declared.
