Discourse & Communication

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to register for SAGE Language and Linguistics journals

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schryer, C. F.
Right arrow Articles by Lingard, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Discourse & Communication, Vol. 1, No. 4, 452-479 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1750481307082208

Co-management in healthcare: negotiating professional boundaries

Catherine F. Schryer

UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO, cschryer{at}watarts.uwaterloo.ca

Olga Gladkova

UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO

Marlee M. Spafford

UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO

Lorelei Lingard

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO

This article investigates discursive practices associated with the co-management of patients between healthcare providers. Specifically, we focus on two genres (38 referral letters and 37 consultant reports) written by optometrists and ophthalmologists — two groups who are experiencing interprofessional tension over their scopes of practice. In our analysis we foreground four kinds of modality associated with verbs — epistemic, deontic, phatic and subjective. We found that these healthcare providers shared in the epistemic resources used to hedge their sense of clinical certainty, and that ophthalmologists used deontic resources to control future action. However, we also noted that both professions used deontic, phatic and subjective resources to create dialogical space for each other to participate in some future relationship. In fact, one of the main points of this correspondence might be to establish personal relationships between practitioners. Unfortunately, however, this subtle use of modality to negotiate professional boundaries is fading as many ophthalmologists, due to workload issues, are not responding to referral letters or are converting their correspondence to form letters.

Key Words: discourse analysis • genre • healthcare communication • modality • ophthalmology • optometry


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?